Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => Straight, Inc. and Derivatives => Topic started by: Anonymous on October 22, 2007, 05:42:46 PM
-
When I first started reading on this site it was in response to hearing that AARC is a cult. I googled "AARC" and this forum came up.
First of all, I am over 30 years sober by the grace of God and not by any man, institution, organization, or self will. I do know what “out of controlâ€
-
The ISAC report is very sketchy with point form details referring mainly to the history of AARC and its link to other disreputable organizations. According to ISAC this link ended 17 years ago in 1990. It is stated that Dr. Vause was offered a position with this organization but it doesn’t indicate that he took the position. Based on the information found in the ISAC report, Dr. Vause was affiliated with the Kids of Bergen County in 1989 and was offered the position in Canada in 1990. This means that in all of his life experience there was one year or less that he was associated with this organization. Prior to that he was a high school guidance counselor with a reputable school board but it does not indicate for how long. This position would have afforded him experience in dealing with troubled teens prior to his association with the Miller Newton program. It could have also been his motivation for pursuing his studies and the twelve years of research that was attributed to Dr. Vause would have included this period of time prior to his involvement with the Kids of Bergen County as well as research work done following his involvement. In 1992 Dr. Vause founded AARC rather than become associated with Kids of the Canadian West program.
As far as credentials are concerned, the Union Institute where Dr. Vause earned his PHD is in fact accredited (and has been since at least 1985) by the The Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools which is recognized by the US Department of Education. http://www.ncahlc.org/index.php?option= ... Itemid=113 (http://www.ncahlc.org/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=113)
I think it would be best to stop defaming this institution in this forum. The fact that one less than reputable graduate has earned a degree there in no way reflects on the quality of education provided. Those that have proven their reputation should not simply be dismissed as authorities due to their connection with this institution. Many highly educated, accredited, and licensed professionals in many fields have proven to be inadequate and even destructive in their practices. I have looked on line at other higher learning institutions and you can obtain a PHD through correspondence or on line at a number of them including the University of Calgary. Athabasca University is an accredited Canadian fully distance learning institution as well. It is possible that the Union Institute was just ahead of its time. Dr. Vause did obtain his Masters in Educational Psychology prior to doing his Doctoral Studies in the same field.
There was a comment in another forum about some of the clients helping Dr. Vause to write his thesis. I was once involved in doing research for someone writing a Master’s Thesis. I had to interview seniors on their shopping habits. I helped with research but in no way did I help write the paper. I can’t see anywhere on the AARC website that claims Dr. Vause is a psychologist.
There was little else on the ISAC site that could shed any light on my research concerning AARC specifically. They provided no testimonials, no references to reports, complaints or investigations and has not been updated since it was created in 2003
-
As far as this forum is concerned I find that it has been completely uninformative. There have been accusations without any facts to back them up, there have been character slurs on both sides, there have been valid questions left unanswered, there have been assumptions made about legitimate queries (I can only speak for myself), and all around reading the different threads has left me exhausted, frustrated, and a little depressed.
I know that as an outsider with nothing to gain or lose, my opinion means very little. I will offer it anyways as food for thought.
I feel that although not perfect, and certain aspects, if this site is legitimate, should be investigated, AARC should not be considered a cult.
This is what I gleaned from reading postings on this site:
They reintegrate their clients back into society and yes they offer after care support but it is not enforced and their freedom of choice in where they live, work, and recreate is not dictated. The only criterion for continued association is sobriety. The exclusion of some who are no longer clean and sober and show no desire to work at it indicates that it is not open to whosoever, only those with a serious desire to become and stay healthy. Otherwise they would be welcomed back and be kept at step one indefinitely.
They do fund raise and in gratitude, many former clients or their families financially support them. I have a child who had life saving surgery as a youngster and I still get requests for donations from the hospital every year, 18 years later. I give or don’t give according to my own choosing.
A great deal of time is spent on Changing the minds and attitudes of the clients but only with regards to drugs and alcohol.
Amongst the postings in favour of AARC there is a very high regard for the director, Dr. Vause. This could be considered alarming however it could also simply be respect and gratitude towards an individual who had a positive impact on their lives. Many people show extreme regard for former doctors, teachers, coaches, counselors and mentors who have had positive influence or have helped them through difficult experiences in their lives.
Some former clients go on to volunteer or work at AARC. These former clients desiring to work at AARC should be commended rather than condemned. Many people discover their vocation through difficult personal experience and bring empathy and compassion to their work. If the experience were negative this would be last place they would want to work. If they have been subjected to mind control and brainwashing I would think they would not be successful in their studies in the field or the real world education would bring them to their senses.
Many have gone on to lead productive lives in other fields and have no association with AARC at all.
Parents or courts must sign the child over to AARC and they are not recruited without an authority figure’s initial consent. No parent or court would sign over a child unless they are exhibiting at least some form of extreme behaviour. If a mistake has been made, after a time, the child is released even if the parent and/or child would like them to continue with the program.
There are a limited number of spaces available and there is a waiting list.
There have been some incidences of suicide and violent crimes that have been committed by former clients. In reading up on the details all I can see is that AARC does not have a 100% guarantee. There have been many such tragedies in the lives of people treated through traditional methods as well. The people involved in these incidents were involved in high risk lifestyles in spite of AARC. Another question that this brings up is: Has AARC ever referred anyone to outside professional help if the client could not be helped through the AARC program?
I know that this is far from exhaustive but it has been exhausting to me. I do hope that this issue is resolved soon and the truth is exposed once and for all. I will be checking up on here from time to time to see if there is anything new. I hope to stay away from commenting unless of course I have to clear up any misconceptions about my own personal intent, integrity, character, or meaning.
-
What accusations were those? What character slurs? What questions? What queries? Thanks ever so much though for your opinions. My life has been altered forever. I can't speak for anyone else here, but after you telling me no to, I will never consider AARC a cult again. And also, because you said so, I commend all of the AARCies who still flit around the leader. I'm curious as to how you know so much about the lives of AARC grads.
I'm also curious as to how you know that no parent or court would sign over their child unless the child were exhibiting at least some form of extreme behaviour. In order for you to know this, you would have to possess some supernatural power. If you do, perhaps you could market it. As far as referring to outside help, after AARC announced that my SLF was suicidal, she was put on Zero Club. Her attending psychiatrist was another teenaged girl, her Oldcomer.
There is only one article on AARC's website from Report Magazine, and it contains a description of Vause as a psychologist.
You have made an important contribution to the advancement of mental health research, and to the cause of justice. I will see to it that schools and libraries are named for you in the future. Thank you.
-
Wow! A thoughtful, balanced and insightful group of statements.
Prepare to be abused.
-
Did you mean thoughtful, balanced and insightful statements like AARC should not be considered a cult. Who, exactly are you to decide how anyone should consider anything? And who are you to say that the clients turned staff at AARC should be commended? If you don't consider it a cult, you're welcome to your opinion. If you think that the clients turned staff should be commended, again, that's your right. But like all good group-thinkers, you're compelled to tell others what to think. Thanks again.
Thanks also for ignoring the Hansard report wherein the Alberta Government acknowledges that AARC was Kids of the Canadian West.
-
In my defense, I did say at that this was my opinion and merely food for thought. I take very little at face value.
-
When I first started reading on this site it was in response to hearing that AARC is a cult. I googled "AARC" and this forum came up.
First of all, I am over 30 years sober by the grace of God and not by any man, institution, organization, or self will. I do know what “out of controlâ€
-
If you are referring to the Document found on the Endorsement page of the AARC Web-site, I reread the document and found no reference to Dr. Vause as a psychologist. He has a Masters degree and a Phd in Educational Psychology. If this exerpt comes from a larger more detailed document please provide a link and I will recant. As for the accusations, character slurs, questions and queries, one simply has to read the threads on this forum to find them. I wouldn't have the time to list them all. They are on both sides of the debate. That is why I find this forum to be ineffectual. Somehow I don't think this is what Velvet envisioned when she started this forum many years ago.
-
If you are referring to the Document found on the Endorsement page of the AARC Web-site, I reread the document and found no reference to Dr. Vause as a psychologist. He has a Masters degree and a Phd in Educational Psychology. If this exerpt comes from a larger more detailed document please provide a link and I will recant. As for the accusations, character slurs, questions and queries, one simply has to read the threads on this forum to find them. I wouldn't have the time to list them all. They are on both sides of the debate. That is why I find this forum to be ineffectual. Somehow I don't think this is what Velvet envisioned when she started this forum many years ago.
Dr. F. Dean Vause, PhD., (Executive Director)
Dr. Dean Vause previously worked as a guidance counselor at the secondary school level.
(Source: http://www.education.ualberta.http://ww ... c4a-1.html (http://www.education.ualberta.http://www.education.ualberta.ca/educ/research/tri-fac/enviro/sec4a-1.html)). Dr.
Vause received his doctorate from Union University, a correspondence school that bills
itself as “a university without walls.â€
-
Plus the models are identical, perhaps a few name changes only. And don't forget AARC was original called Kids of the Canadian West i.e. the Canadian branch of Kids of North Jersey, the program started by Newton in the 80's after he left straight.
-
When I first started reading on this site it was in response to hearing that AARC is a cult. I googled "AARC" and this forum came up.
First of all, I am over 30 years sober by the grace of God and not by any man, institution, organization, or self will. I do know what “out of controlâ€
-
Vause being called a psychiatrist:
Recovering Krystal
User Rating 12345[rate this film]
Producer(s) Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
Director(s) David Tucker
Release Date 2003
Runtime 45 min
Format(s) 16mm, 35mm, video, DVD, web
Language(s) English
Youth Media no
Film Description
This moving video tells the dramatic story of Krystal Meade, a teenage drug addict and runaway, who is forced under court order to confront her personal demons through a unique alcohol and drug treatment program. The story may sound familiar, but the Alberta Addiction Recovery Center (AARC) differs from other drug rehabilitation programs in its insistence on treating the families of abusers alongside the young addicts. AARC's method is premised on the reality that these teens are often the product of parents and families who are substance abusers themselves, like Krystal's father. Other parents, including her mother, may be enablers, helping the kids access the alcohol and drugs they crave or looking the other way while they continue their abuse.
Under the leadership of psychiatrist Dean Vause, AARC works with troubled teens and their families over an intense and often grueling eight to twelve-month period. Though structured on a minimum-security model, the program nonetheless entails tracking the activities and whereabouts of the teens at all times. Therapy is based on the twelve-step Alcoholics Anonymous program, plus both one-on-one counseling and group sessions. It requires that both the teens and their parents receive therapy, to address the devastating emotional scars of their dependencies. During treatment, the teens are not permitted to live at home or to communicate with their families until all members have been involved in the recovery process. Instead, they are accommodated by the families of other students who have completed the program.
While the approach shown may not be effective with all substance abusers, the stories of Krystal and her friends reflect the realities experienced by thousands of other adolescents. Emotionally harrowing, this compassionate program challenges professionals to explore new ways of reaching troubled teens and their families.
-
When I first started reading on this site it was in response to hearing that AARC is a cult. I googled "AARC" and this forum came up.
First of all, I am over 30 years sober by the grace of God and not by any man, institution, organization, or self will. I do know what “out of controlâ€
-
I started off as an information seeker and now I am genuinely concerned for those who come to this forum thinking they will find truth. Not everyone will attempt to verify claims and read through everything trying to be objective. I do appreciate Velvet's last post urging victims to go to the Calgary Police. If there are genuine abuses taking place then the best avenue would be through the traditional means.
The following is exactly why I don’t find this forum reliable, accurate or informative. My words have been either taken out of context or in this case:
A statement:
was changed from its original wording saying that the Hansard document found on the Endorsements page of the AARC web-site claims Dr. Vause was a psychologist. I challenged that comment in a later posting and now it is gone. I know I cannot prove this. This new statement is also incorrect as I can see no where in the document that states AARC was Kids of the Canadian West. I did not ignore the report; I read it many times over. I now know why people are very careful to copy the quote rather than just comment on it or restate it. I still am not able to find any validated link between AARC founded in 1992 and Kids of the Canadian West proposed in 1990 and not, as far as I am able to tell, ever actually opened as a treatment center. In the ISAC report it states that it was opened as a “support center to aid kids who had been through Kids of Bergen Countyâ€
-
Hello Interested,
I pulled this from March 24, 1992. If you open the document in word, the reference can be found on Page 9.
http://www.assembly.ab.ca/net/index.asp ... =doc&fid=1 (http://www.assembly.ab.ca/net/index.aspx?p=han§ion=doc&fid=1)
MR. NELSON: Mr. Speaker, AADAC has been involved with assistance in developing the program of the Alberta Adolescent Recovery Centre since its inception originally as Kids of the Canadian West. They have developed an exceptionally good program to assist in the care of young people in the province of Alberta for recovery in alcohol and other substances abuses as well as other disorders. Alberta today has without a doubt exceptional programs for adolescent care, unmatched anywhere in Canada and in fact probably in the United States. As far as I'm concerned, with the support of the government there is in general terms no reason for young people to have to go to the states. There is a misconception that because it is an American program it is better. That is not the case. Alberta has excepÂtional programs that can meet the needs of Albertans in all age groups and particularly our adolescents.
-
Also, Interested,
There are many things about AARC and my experience there specifically that I do not post about here. If you are truly interested in the kids who have been through AARC and our stories, feel free to contact me. You can do that by registering and private messaging me or if you post some way of contacting you, I will.
-
Thank you for the link. I was able to trace it through the date you gave me. I don't know why the query raised nothing when I made it. I concede. My appologies.
-
There are many more references to AARC on this Web-site if anyone is interested. I sorted by relevancy rather than date and much more came up.
-
I have also now been able to find the references to Kids of the Canadian West on the same web site sorted by relevancy. The query is case sensitive.
-
Yeah, the search function is also a bit buggy. I've had to backtrack to the page before it and back a few times.
-
I think I also found the link for the Recovering Krystal synopsis. They must have removed the reference to Dr. Vause as a psychiatrist. It looks to me like the same one copied into the thread. I found another one too.
http://www.fanlight.com/catalog/films/378_rk.php (http://www.fanlight.com/catalog/films/378_rk.php)
http://www.sbs.com.au/whatson/index.php3?id=483 (http://www.sbs.com.au/whatson/index.php3?id=483)
If these don't work, you can google her name. That is how I found them.
One of the guests wanted to know how to locate a copy. I think you can order a one from one of these sites.
-
Here is another link to a similar synopsis which does include the psychiatrist reference. http://www.mediarights.org/film/recovering_krystal (http://www.mediarights.org/film/recovering_krystal)
I concede. It is out there in places. Where the source is I don't know.
-
Yes, I wrote to them, here is thei response:
Dear *********:
Thank you for your thoughtful comments on our description of the film Recovering Krystal, which we distribute. The film, as you know, was produced by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Fanlight Production distributes a number of films produced by the CBC. Since we are not involved in the production of these programs, we are of course not in a position to evaluate every aspect of the content, but we have generally found them to be well researched and -- as far as we are able to tell -- accurate.
The description of the film on our website was based on materials sent to us by the CBC. However, having checked AARC's website as well as other sources on the internet, I think that the comment in your first paragraph regarding the reasons for the treatment of families is a fair one. We will change that text as soon as possible. We will also remove the reference to Dr. Vause as a psychiatrist. I appreciate your bringing this to our attention.
Your family's experiences with the AARC were obviously pretty negative compared to Krystal's, and I'm sorry to hear that. Both the film and our description of it note that their approach doesn't work for everyone. Nonetheless we think it presents a valuable portrait of a young person recovering from addition, that has proved useful to many of our customers.
I would encourage you to send your comments to the CBC and to Dr. Suzuki as well as to Fanlight.
Best wishes,
Ben Achtenberg
President
[/b]
-
Well that explains the sudden retraction on, or around, the 15th.
-
There is something very strange about Interested's approach here. If the stories posted by Rachael, Mel, and any others relating abuses at AARC, then it means that there are some very serious problems at AARC that have never been addressed. If neither Rachael nor Mel were drug addicts, it begs the question how did they get admitted to AARC? If AARC is providing intensive treatment for chemically addicted people, how could these two have passed through a proper screening process?
If the accounts of abuse at the hands of oldcomers are true, what remedies were implemented by AARC to prevent such occurrences? If none were implemented, then why not?
There is no way for Interested to disprove the claims of survivors, whether they claim that AARC saved their lives or that AARC destroyed them. If the accounts of abuse are true, then AARC is beset with very serious problems, and unless the accounts of abuse can be disproved, all of the evidence backing up AARC is meaningless.
Mel claims that Vause referred to himself as a psychologist. This can be neither proven nor disproven, but AARC's own website carries a magazine article in which Vause is described as such. What it does is provide evidence that supports Mel's claim, while not proving it. As the College of Psychologist has replied to several inquiries with the response that Vause is not a psychologist, one is left to ask why he would make that claim.
Rachael claims to have been assaulted by her oldcomer. While this cannot be proven, ample evidence of similar abuse in other programs using the oldcomer/newcomer dynamic exists. This again lends credence to the survivor's story.
Interested has not provided any evidence that would disprove the claims made by these people.
As Interested cannot disprove the claims of abuse, and ample accounts of AARC's effectiveness are available on AARC's own website, it begs the question as to what Interested is attempting to do in this forum.
-
Yes, I wrote to them, here is thei response:
Dear *********:
Thank you for your thoughtful comments on our description of the film Recovering Krystal, which we distribute. The film, as you know, was produced by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Fanlight Production distributes a number of films produced by the CBC. Since we are not involved in the production of these programs, we are of course not in a position to evaluate every aspect of the content, but we have generally found them to be well researched and -- as far as we are able to tell -- accurate.
The description of the film on our website was based on materials sent to us by the CBC. However, having checked AARC's website as well as other sources on the internet, I think that the comment in your first paragraph regarding the reasons for the treatment of families is a fair one. We will change that text as soon as possible. We will also remove the reference to Dr. Vause as a psychiatrist. I appreciate your bringing this to our attention.
Your family's experiences with the AARC were obviously pretty negative compared to Krystal's, and I'm sorry to hear that. Both the film and our description of it note that their approach doesn't work for everyone. Nonetheless we think it presents a valuable portrait of a young person recovering from addition, that has proved useful to many of our customers.
I would encourage you to send your comments to the CBC and to Dr. Suzuki as well as to Fanlight.
Best wishes,
Ben Achtenberg
President
[/b]
Shortly after the Recovering Crystal broadcast I was provided a report from ISAC which they asked that I provide to Dr Suzuki. He attended in Edmonton and I provided the package to him after a speech he had given (on unrelated matters) at the University of Alberta.
On January 17th 2003 he sent a handwritten reply as follows:
thank-you for your letter and the material. I've forwarded them to Dr. Vause of AARC so he can respond to you directly.
I knew of AARC because Dean's wife is a cousin of my wife. So I had seen articles and reports on AARC and suggested to David Tucker that he do research into the program. Tucker decided it was worth doing and proceeded with it. I had nothing to do with the show until I narrated the script but I found the film to be moving and compelling -- a powerful film.
"David Suzuki"
So, there you have it: Dr. Suzuki not only has a family relationship to Dean Vause, albeit distant, but he really didn't have anything to do with the film other than narrating to a script. He doesn't even say that he was there when the film was made!!!
It's not that David Suzuki is the person to be challenged, it's the whole CBC process that had unqualified people drawing emotive conclusions on a film that was made under conditions tightly controlled by an expert propagandist and con artist who has a family relationship that he exploits.
I really do not know whether Dr. Suzuki read the materials I provided him. But Dean Vause did not contact me as he had suggested. And Dean Vause knew perfectly well where to contact me because he had all my contact information.
Since then I have occasionally taken a look back at this site, and spoken directly to people who are now in therapy for the abuse they suffered while in AARC. For those dear readers who say, "Well why don't they proceed with charges," I say that for PTSD it just isn't that simple.
For those of you with personal experiences, I suggest the person to talk to is not David Suzuki. Maybe Peter Mansbridge or somebody from W5 might ask a few more penetrating questions Or at least get some journalist with legal and/or psychological training. How about Carol Off (sp?). Somebody in the tradition of Barbara Frum . Hey, Ian Hanomansing is a lawyer. I think he'd listen.
-
There is something very strange about Interested's approach here.
My approach is and always has been seeking information and trying to get to facts that would satisfy me as to my own opinions concerning AARC. As I reread my previous posts I realized that what I have been doing is actually recording my thoughts and questions concerning what I have read here.
If the stories posted by Rachael, Mel, and any others relating abuses at AARC, then it means that there are some very serious problems at AARC that have never been addressed.
I have never stated that Rachael and Mel’s stories were in any way untrue, exaggerated, or without merit. I did say that if they are true then there needs to be real investigation and not just bantering back and forth on a web forum that really has very little power to make any significant change. What I have questioned and challenged were the statements that I felt were opinion stated as fact or exaggerations to make a point. I take very little at face value. My question is still, why have these serious problems never been addressed in 15 years of operation?
If neither Rachael nor Mel were drug addicts, it begs the question how did they get admitted to AARC? If AARC is providing intensive treatment for chemically addicted people, how could these two have passed through a proper screening process?
In one of my previous posts I stated that “No parent or court would sign over a child unless they are exhibiting at least some form of extreme behaviourâ€
-
Escalation to a critical point does not mean chemical addiction. Chemical addiction is chemical addiction. AARC is not presented as a behaviour modification program for unmanageable teens, it is presented as a treatment centre for adolescents suffering from drug addiction. Whether or not all concerned feel that a situation is serious, a screening process must exist for AARC to determine addiction. According to Rachael and Mel, this does not exist. As there is no psychiatrist at AARC, and a chemical drug screen is not performed at each intake, there is no reason to doubt these women.
Mel's claim dates to the early nineties, Rachael's from five years ago. That covers ten years of AARC's existence. Again, as it is consistent for Straight-modelled programs to foster oldcomer abuse of newcomers, do AARC's links to Kids and Straight increase or decrease the likelihood of abuse at AARC?
The issues raised all have to do with AARC. Like all other Straight descendents, AARC has amateurs assessing and treating adolescents. The "treatment" model, taken from Kids, which was taken from Straight, which was taken from the Seed, which was taken from Synanon, is harmful.
As to references to Vause as a psychologist, AARC maintains a copy of the Report article in which Vause is described as a psychologist, on their website. AARC's own website seems to be the only site on the web where one can see Vause described as a psychologist. This article dates from AARC's tenth year of operation, and has been maintained on their website for many years.
Perhaps Interested could fall on his knees, declare his powerlessness, and ask Dean Vause to help with his AARCSurvivor addiction.
-
Rachael claims to have been assaulted by her oldcomer. While this cannot be proven, ample evidence of similar abuse in other programs using the oldcomer/newcomer dynamic exists. This again lends credence to the survivor's story.
Has Rachael filed a complaint? If so, what was the response? If not, I still don’t understand why not? She may not have felt she had a voice while in AARC but now as an adult without limitations on her freedom, why not? If what I read on this site is true then she would have many people backing her up.
I don't know Rachael very well and have never asked her these questions. But I understand why some people would not file complaints. Ever been through a criminal trial? It's never easy on the victim witnesses. The defence will go to any length within their ability to attack the witness on every level. That's par for the course. I've seen it done to a 10yo rape victim. It's not pretty.
When the perpetrators are clerics (as in this case, clerics in the unholy war on certain un-patentable drugs) it gets much tougher. It's a kangaroo court where the victim is re-victimized. And it's a gambit on the legal level too. A lost case goes to the defence of the criminals. What's worse, they believe their own bullshit.
-
That's an impressive litany of disaster there, friend.
I have not been convinced that AARC is a cult. I am also not convinced that AARC is flawless, and should be given free reign to rule itself without checks and balances, accountability, and monitoring by some sort of agency. I do feel there is a need for something “likeâ€
-
Yeah, it amazes me that anyone can claim that "oh abuse is just fine because addicts need it to recover." Here's a list of the harms done by addiction, so let's use it to justify harming more addicts with fake, harmful "treatment."
there's no evidence that any treatment based on Straight works-- what is original about the Straight model is harmful, what is not harmful is not original and can be found in decent programs everywhere. So there's no reason any program using host homes, oldcomers, any of that nonsense should be open. Period.
in fact, fear of abusive treatment is one of the reasons real addicts *don't* seek help. research shows that most of the "denial" seen in addicts dissolves when you treat them kindly and offer hope. the "denial" is a defense against attack, and attacks actually reinforce it, making matters worse!!!
The research is clear that empathetic, kind, supportive programs work and humiliating confrontational and attacking ones are neither safe nor effective.
Interested is obviously a shill for AARC because anyone without a 'dog in this fight' wouldn't claim to support it if they knew anything at all about what works and what doesn't in the addictions field.