Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Perrigaud on March 19, 2005, 05:21:00 AM
-
As I've said before I am a survivor. Not just the program but life itself. I didn't agree with all that went all in the program. What I ended up doing was using it to my advantage. It's along the lines of "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." I understand how people can see it all as abuse. I however didn't view it that way because I was determined to learn. In any situation good or bad something is available to be taught.
An extreme situation
In Nazi Germany the surviving Jews talk about how they kept themselves free. That freedom was inner freedom. They had the worst of surroundings. Yet they were determined to survive. They could have easily given in and allowed themselves to be shot. There were those who did fight till the end (being murdered). They came out with a better appreciation for life then any of us will ever know. They kept their minds free.
I believe in inner freedom. I have been through a lot of things in my life. I have seen and experienced more than most of you will ever go through. I choose not to let it all defeat me. I have become stronger thanks to those horrific experience.
I believe that Jamaica should be closed. I'm glad that Casa was shut down. I don't know much about the others. Cross Creek? I thank Cross Creek. I have achieved what I have always been looking for with the help of Cross Creek.
True freedom comes within. Yes we didn't have tennis shoes. But we still had protection for our feet. It's not as if we were out in the cold bare foot. Not talking? At Cross Creek we were able to talk more than people think. Yes we were in trouble if we talked about drugs, sex, suicide and such. But my parents would have been upset if I talked about that at home. Seminars? Very emotionally upset to some people. Some are even scarred. I am not. I felt it releiving to talk about all that was on my chest. What do I have to hide from? Judgement? Please people will judge all the time. It wasn't scary to me and still isn't. In fact a lot of my emotional healing happened in the seminars. Yes there were some processes I didn't even agree on nor supported. I didn't go through with them. I told the facilitator why I didn't go through them. I wasn't reprimanded nor held back for it. Amazing I know. Being told what to do when to do it. We deal with that every day and by choice and not by choice. Some rules were rediculous yes, but was I going to bitch about it? No, life is filled with idiotic rules. Is it right that kids are abused? Not at all. That I do wish to eliminate as well.
I thank Cross Creek for giving me different views on life. I AM angry at the people who victimized students. I feel for the victims and hope that a stop will be put to the negative aspects. A reformation is in order. But to be honest I don't think it will happen. I think that they'll just have to shut down completely to abstain from harming the teens.
I commend you all for your passion and drive for what you believe in. I have a great deal of respect for most people on this board even if they don't aggree with me.
All in all I believe that no matter what one goes through inner freedom can never be taken away. Being peaceful is such a wonderful feeling. I still have problems don't get me wrong. I still have unfair crap happening. I choose to deal with it head on. I will never give up on myself. No matter how hard life is. Good luck to you all. If you ever have any specific questions feel free to ask. No matter what it is I will answer with sheer honesty.
-
I would love to see Cross Creek go independent, but that's probably not going to happen due to the support of the seminars and other resources. I am constantly amazed at the process and with my kid's therapist.
The boy I talked with that graduated in 2001, in all honesty, I believe, said he never saw, heard or experienced abuse and had much the same tone as you do Perrigaud. Taking what fit and letting the rest go.
How do you feel some of the kids were scarred by the seminars? I just can't picture that one.
I'm in the Keys to Success seminar series - I've done the communication and the addiction ones and am looking forward to others. I know the adult ones are different from the kids, but with many of the same exercises and processes. It was freeing for me and I was a pretty closed and sensitive person with definite views on certain things. I let a lot of things go, but have revisited some of the concepts and used more than in the beginning.
I've been dealing with way more than my kid my whole life, and having the seminars bring a lot of the stuff out into the open has been a good thing in my case. There's a lot of support to keep working when I need it, or ask for it. (This isn't to say my kid doesn't need it as much as I do)
Gotta go - just wanted to say I love reading your posts - :smile:
-
I'm going to try to keep this short but sweet, so I dont ruffle feathers.
For those that were helped, I am glad.
Tolerating idiotic rules is a important skill, but it doesnt mean they should be merely accepted or that they're beneficial.
Restricting communication about some subjects, or restricting communication TOTALLY has and can be used to make people feel controled, and helpless. Was it in your situation, Perrigaud? I dont know, I'm no expert. I wont make that determination.
Furthermore, why can't they talk about "drugs sex suicide and such"? Those might be why they WENT there? It seems like its the program trying to bury certain parts of life, TO ME. All WWASPS has to say about drugs sex and suicide (as far as I know from here and other websites) is 'dont do it'. For some people that might work, for people who arent like that, it probably wont. Et tu, Perrigaud? :wink:
And, finally, While these seminars might have been good for you two, for PLENTY of other people, its torture. Yet again, the only analogy I can think of is how different people react to being the submissive in a BDSM scene. Only those psychologically predisposed to enjoy it will enjoy it, and those psychologically predisposed to freak out and suffer would hate it. I'm sure there is also a middle-ground that would just be really bored. Some people feel SAFE when tied up! I'm a claustrophobe so I cant even tolerate elevators!
Thats basically all I gotta say for now, except my voicemail isnt working. Leave PM please.say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith, I consider a capacity for it terrifying and absolutely vile.
--Kurt Vonnegut, American author
-
I appreciate your analogy Nihl.
-
Nihil, I don't know if you're analogy applies in this case. You're forgetting a big issue, and that is that WWASP/S's program is based on coercive persuasion. Through sleep deprivation, food depriovation, and intense psychological pressure, these people are made to believe that the process they have been through was not abusive, and that they have been "saved" by the program. Succumbing to this process has nothing to do with personal preference and predisposition. It has everything to do with coercive persuasion.
-
Sleep deprivation. Damn right. Having to go to bed by 10pm and up by 6 is really the most abusive part of any program. Don't they know that teenagers need at least 12 hours of sleep a night? :wink:
-
Before a seminar, kids are often made to wake up at about 3 a.m. That's sleep deprivation. They get to these seminars deprived of sleep and food, which make them less able to resist the onslaught of LifeSpring bullshit.
-
at Lifespring maybe. At WWASP we went to bed at 9:00PM not 10. Sleep deprivation. Come up with something real.
Of course you can talk about drugs, sex, and alcohol just not in a glorifying way. We are all addicts of some sort of way.
That's what I meant. Learning that clarity is something I got to work on.
-
Restricting talking about certain subjects in a certain way is not that big of deal in my opinion. Feeling desperate and sad over that? Really? Why?
-
Perri,
You just criticized someone else?s opinion/experience:
?Come up with something real.?
?Feeling desperate and sad over that [not being able to talk]? Really? Why??
Precisely the type of comments that get you involved in arguments with others, in which you feel victimized or misunderstood, as a 100% program supporter. So that wasn?t your experience, so you say. You could have shared that without discounting someone else?s comment. Make sense?
And, please elaborate on this comment:
?We are all addicts of some sort of way.?
-
On 2005-03-20 12:48:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Perri,
You just criticized someone else?s opinion/experience:
?Come up with something real.?
?Feeling desperate and sad over that [not being able to talk]? Really? Why??
Precisely the type of comments that get you involved in arguments with others, in which you feel victimized or misunderstood, as a 100% program supporter. So that wasn?t your experience, so you say. You could have shared that without discounting someone else?s comment. Make sense?
And, please elaborate on this comment:
?We are all addicts of some sort of way.?
"
Uh...in this case, I deserved that.
One of the problems with being bipolar is the meds make you stable (if you're lucky), not "normal."
So if I'm symptomatic, sometimes other people notice before I do. *Usually* it's just people real close to me, but oops.
My rant was pretty much your classic bipolar rage. But since I'm lucky enough to have hypergraphia (compulsive writing is actually a good thing)--in this case I lost it in print. Again, sorry.
Anyway, she had good reason to be grumpy with me.
Timoclea
-
I don't claim to be a victim. I never said that. What I did say is that I do get misunderstood. It happens every day to everyone.
-
Personally Tim, I think your points were valid. They could've been delivered differently, but I hope you're not apologizing for what was valid.
-
Anonymous,
What points did you find valid and why?
P.S. Anonymous: interesting.[ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-03-21 01:40 ]
-
On 2005-03-20 15:24:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Personally Tim, I think your points were valid. They could've been delivered differently, but I hope you're not apologizing for what was valid.
"
I apologized because she copied verbatim from a handbook and I read too much into it.
When the lack of added commentary could have been for any number of reasons, including not having the time right then to comment. Or a large number of reasons many of which might not occur to me if I tried to list some.
In *general* taking the emotional content out and talking *generally* about victim blaming and kids from the programs being indoctrinated that what they're experiencing is not abuse, sure, there are points there.
But for Perri, for a section copied verbatim from program materials in response to a request, it was reading way too much into it.
Timoclea
-
Timoclea,
I realize we are all humans. Thank you for realizing what was going on and apologizing. It takes a lot for people to do that nowadays. I myself messed up a day ago when I told someone their point wasn't valid in my eyes.
-
Whether you feel these are valid to you, they are valid in general.
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?mo ... rt=0&Sort= (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic=8710&forum=9&start=0&Sort=)
These aren't priveleges. With the exception of jewelry and make-up, these are very, very basic human rights.
Not to provide the level 6 "privileges" is what the *rest* of the US calls "child neglect."
If the parents did not do that, in any state I am aware of, child welfare would take the children out of the home for child neglect. Particularly over the shoes issue.
If I provided my child with food that was substantially different and worse from my own food, unless I had consulted a nutritionist and the different diet was medically necessary for her health, I would lose my child and be prosecuted for wilfull criminal child neglect.
If I required my child to go around all day without being able to talk to other people, I would be prosecuted for criminal child *abuse*, if I failed to fix the problem after being warned.
That you think those deprivations are not criminal child abuse and neglect, and are not woefully out of compliance with minimum community standards for how children are entitled to be treated, is [could be] evidence that yes, you *have* been brainwashed.
That you can even for a moment describe them as "privileges"---even in retrospect you don't believe all of them were "right"----is evidence [could indicate] that you have undergone deep and pervasive brainwashing that successfully tampered with your mind.
The abuse and neglect you have suffered has [may have] put you at high risk of abusing neglecting your own children in the false belief that these behaviors are not harmful to the child and are, in fact, acceptable forms of discipline.
I'm so sorry for what happened to you, but you *mustn't* go on thinking those things are okay for fear that you, as an adult with adult responsibilities, harm a child someday.
*NO* child deserves to have the basic social contact of talking to people, shoes, or seeing her parents treated as "privileges" to be withheld for bad behavior. *Nobody* deserves that. It is not helpful or positive to do that to any child.
A rape survivor may be stronger after the rape as a result of recovering from the rape, but that doesn't mean the rape "helped" her.
-
Well you see it one way and I see it another. I'm pregnant right now. I have no doubt that I'll be a good mother.
Did I ever say that I was going to hold my child to the same standards as WWASP? No. And I don't plan on doing that. My child will grow up to be a wonderful person.
My parents grew up in strict religious families. They like religion but not to the point where I grew up religious. I mispelled that word I know. Anyhow, just because I don't call it abuse doesn't mean I will use it in my everyday life. Please stop with that. It's really annoying.
Brainwashed. Call it whatever you want to. I don't call it brainwash. You do. Fine we'll agree to disagree.
In my opinion the media is more brainwashing then WWASP. And in 20 years you shall have the results of my parenting. And we did get to talk to people. We weren't on silence 24/365. Did you not read my post?
-
No you never said you'd hold your own child to W standards, but then no one said you did.
The point being, many a parent has said that they'd never treat their children the way they were treated. Well, as they often find out, conditioning is not easy to change- it's like one's default drive unless, or until it is reprogrammed. The parent pushed to their limit, in a moment of frustration, out comes the razor strap.
It's a warning Peri. You may not be pulled to treat your child that way. If you are, perhaps you'll get some help. There's also the possibility that if your child pushes you too far, you could (notice I said 'could') determine that s/he indeed 'needed' or 'deserved' to be treated that way.
Every comment made about W is not directed at you, or intended to be a comment about 'your' experience. There are other ex's speaking here that allege to have had a very different experience, which included lengthy periods of silence. "I got to talk to people" would be sharing your experience. "We got to talk to people" is speaking for who? All W programs, your program, everyone's experience?
-
"The abuse and neglect you have suffered has [may have] put you at high risk of abusing neglecting your own children in the false belief that these behaviors are not harmful to the child and are, in fact, acceptable forms of discipline. "
Hmm. Then why say you? When you do that you direct the statement toward me. Yes of course I know that people have felt victimized by the program. That is how they choose to feel. I don't. I am very patient. And yes my child will be knowing the importance of appreciating life. No I will not be holding them to a level system.
I'd never harm a child. The personal things you bring up are not valid and are quite a low blow. I'd never ridicule your parenting skills especially if I don't know you well enough to say such things.
-
Oh,and no I was not brainwashed. But again that's how I feel. You are free to feel how you want to.
-
***Hmm. Then why say you?
Well, 'I' didn't say 'you'. Tim did. I added [may have, could have, etc] to de-personalize the comments that I felt were very valid, in general, and not specific to you.
Tim has already apologized for the 'low blow'. Understand this, my point was:
Remove all the personal stuff and some of Tims points are statistically valid. People absolutely are inclined to parent the way they were parented. It generally takes great effort not to do so. That is not to say you won't, or that you won't be a great parent.
-
Wasnt it you who wrote what I quoted?
In the same respect as we parent as we were parented there are a lot who parent opposite of how they were parented.
-
If you are refering to this quote:
"The abuse and neglect you have suffered has [may have] put you at high risk of abusing neglecting your own children in the false belief that these behaviors are not harmful to the child and are, in fact, acceptable forms of discipline. "
Nope. I added [may have] as a suggestion as to how it could've been phrased.
I agree. I was one of those parents. And I was only about 85% successful, despite my best intentions, because that 'default drive' I spoke of was stronger about 15% of the time. [ This Message was edited by: Deborah on 2005-03-21 21:33 ]
-
I don't know if I buy that anyway.
Over http://www.prisonexp.org/ (http://www.prisonexp.org/)
A Simulation Study of the
Psychology of Imprisonment
Conducted at Stanford University
* I think the arcane term for cild advocate was "decent person". And most people are decent people. But we no longer look after the smaller members of our society, because we think that's what the declared child advocates are there for. We're encouraged to call an anonymous tip hotline if we're worried about a neighbor, but not to get to know the neighbors and build the kind of community where kids are pretty well looked after by the whole neighborhood by default.
Screening pre-school kids for anti-social behavior is about as useful as screening the Christian Coalition for sanctimonious behavior.
Anonymity Anonymous (http://fornits.com/anonanon)
Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps.
-
:nworthy: :nworthy: Ginger you've got a knack for cutting right through the bullshit.
I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard was not what I meant.
---Richard Nixon
-
Comes from years and years of shoveling it. :rofl:
Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following
pages, are not yet sufficiently fashionable to procure them
general favor; a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong,
gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises
at first a formidable outcry in defence of custom. But the
tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.
Thomas Paine, Common Sense
-
Well you have a point. But I don't think that there is a one-parenting fits all. Of course there are limitations and boundaries. But it's along the line of is it ok to spank your kids? Is it ok to ground them? Does it work for them.
I digress. The program hasn't worked for everyone. But do you think it's possible that there are people out there that managed to not get "brainwashed" and instead used it as an advantage in their lives? Could it be that they managed to benefit from the experience? Could it be that later on in their lives they used what they had learned in the program to raise successful kids? I have seen all of the above. I have friends who now have 20 year olds that are normal. Meaning they had their share of acting out but nothing extreme. I've seen both sides of the spectrum.
-
Perrigaud, just because you avoided being unduly influenced and got something out of it (and not being scarred emotionally) doesnt mean its the best thing or even a good thing!
Thats basically been our point all along. You've reconciled your experience, which was totally out of your control, and grew up and turned out for the better. Thats great! Thats also YOUR accomplishment and nobody elses.
People grow and develop and whatnot from all kinds of adversity. But that doesnt mean suffering and going through bullshit is a good thing. Dealing with arbitrary authority and bullshit rules is a good coping skill but ultimately is self defeating. This is the USA, not some fascist state (yet..) and if there is bullshit or arbitrary authority what we're supposed to do is challenge it and change it and FIX IT.
For a kid in a program your only hope is to tow the line and get out. For people out of it, or grown adults past the age of majority with a conscience our job is to fix it, not try to explain away how to get a positive experience out of a expensive multi-year banquet of bullshit.
You dealt with an experience in the best way you could have. But that doesnt mean it was the best experience or even a good one. I'm going through a lot of shit myself because of how much of a total asshole my dad is. Instead of be supportive he was hurtful. And now, hes made a habit of repeatedly suing my mom for all kinds of bullshit, and then suing her (he makes her annual income in two months...) for CHILD SUPPORT after he lied to the cops and stole my sisters. I live with my mom and half-sister now. CPS has successfully fucked over my stepdad but I still see him and he still helps us.
Thats bullshit. Yeah wow I learned how to deal with it and got a few callouses and scars so I'm tougher. But this is not something I shouldn't have to deal with. I shouldnt see my family live in poverty because my mom is paying a rich asshole money. I shouldnt have to be reminded daily about how good it would be if my dad would help instead of TAKE AWAY, and I should be able to FIX IT.
The way I dealt with it when I was out of control of the situation as to just grow a tougher hide. But as soon as I get some degree of control (money for a laywer that my dad consciously takes away from us...) I plan on FIXING IT.
The programs need to be fixed too, perrigaud. And theyre also about people paying rich old farts too much money and kids getting bullshit because of it to one degree or another.Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach him to use the Net and he won't bother you for weeks.
--Anonymous
-
Would any of you ever see Perrigaud's view? I don't think so because all I'm reading is - okay, so you got something out of it - what a negative statement! You don't want to see that it was much, much better than juvenile jail, living on the streets, or god forbid, going to a short term hospital thing because insurance paid for it.
I'm sure me as a parent, and Perrigaud as a teen at the time, would have preferred a different scenario, but it didn't happen that way.
Antigen - what your life be like now if you had not had the experiences you had? Do you think you would be a better person, or happier, or whatever?
I understand, I just don't get it
-
Yep. Niles I'm not the only successful "success story". I really got to get them on this forum. It would help. Plus hearing it from just me doesn't help.
The more I read about the negative the more I see the positive. You all make it sound like a torture camp. It wasn't for me. I actually had fun and miss it at times.
I think that we have a tendancy to amplify the negative and let the positive diminish.
-
Were you in Cross Creek? Southern Utah?
-
I don't think Perrigaud is capable of understanding and seeing what went on in there realistically. She screens out everything that challenges her programming, her idea that Cross Creek is a wonderful program that saved her life.
Like those poor kids in Decca Aitkenhead's article, who responded to her "how were you supposed to die?" question with a surprised look, Perrigaud can't even entertain an option contrary to what she's been re-wired to believe.
And like any other WWASPie, she becomes extremely hostile whenever someone challenges her programming.
The sad thing is that people not familiar with the WWASP cult and their method of brainwashing might actually fall for her "I'm strong, I'm self-aware, Cross Creek was paradise, I was horrible before the program and now I'm doing great" act. Sad.
-
On 2005-03-22 13:07:00, Anonymous wrote:
Antigen - what your life be like now if you had not had the experiences you had? Do you think you would be a better person, or happier, or whatever?
Honestly, the way things were going when I was around 12 - 14, yes. I'm as sure as anyone can be that my life was on track and would have been far and away better, hands down, if I hadn't gone into the program.
I was working part time under my dad's supervision (and, to some degree, my brothers... but he was a salesman... they can barely supervise themselves LOL) I was avidly interested in all of the musical and drama courses and activities available in school and from summer programs. I was a health nut. I was very, very little involved in drugs and not at all attracted to the burnout crowd. I got reasonably good grades in all courses, but struggled some w/ algebra. My plan was to go to college, major in something to do w/ music or drama and get a teaching certificate as a fallback.
All that crashed. When I got out of the program I was 2 years behind, and this was just a couple of months before my class graduated. No chance of getting back into that private school anyway. My mother wouldn't even release my school transcripts so I could go to night school in another state. Why would any sane parent deny a request like that? Well, a sane parent wouldn't. But my mother was a Program parent. And so releasing my transcripts, she was told by staff, would have been enabling me (to succeed w/o the program)
Never mind the psych after effects, how I learned to eat shit where I had been well able to hold my own among adults in the workplace or anywhere before. I was whipped, cowed and had forgotten how to even think about anything like high expectations. By the time I began to regain some of my own strength, I was pregnant and obliged to take whatever kind of job would fit around daycare and everything else my daughter would need.
Perri says she was in real trouble before the program. That may or may not be true. I understand completely how one can come to doubt themselves under similar circumstances. For a number of years afterward, everytime something didn't work out, I had to wonder if it wasn't because I really was an addict and didn't know it after all, even though I hadn't had (couldn't afford) any recreational drugs. Program term for that would be "dry druggie".
Yes, indeed, the Program had a horrible impact on me personally and on my life situation. Plus, it cost me my college fund and my inheritance from my grandfather.
I cannot believe in the immortality of the soul.... No, all this talk of an existence for us, as individuals, beyond the grave is wrong. It is born of our tenacity of life -- our desire to go on living -- our dread of coming to an end.
--Thomas Edison, American inventor
-
On 2005-03-22 00:56:00, Perrigaud wrote:
"The program hasn't worked for everyone. But do you think it's possible that there are people out there that managed to not get "brainwashed" and instead used it as an advantage in their lives? Could it be that they managed to benefit from the experience? Could it be that later on in their lives they used what they had learned in the program to raise successful kids?
Well yes, of course. There are plenty of people who come through tragic accidents or other trauma and come out of it stronger and with a better apreciation for life than before. But we don't take that as advocacy for throwing someone under a bus in order to straighten out their lives.
And, again, brainwashed is a loaded term. It's useful if everyone is operating from the same definition and sincerely interested in understanding a situation. I think more appropriate terms for this conversation might be effected and affected.
Wittnessing the abuse of your peers has an impact on you. Living under the threat of getting shipped off to some horrible place like TB has an impact. Enforced silence (even if it didn't extend to higher levels of the program) has a profound psychological impact. Inability to express your true feelings or reaction to situations and not being able to get natural, spontanious social proof from those peers has an impact on the way you think and feel.
I'm glad you didn't let it break you. I don't think I let it break me either. But it has an impact.
Black markets will always be with us. But they will recede in importance when our public morality is consistent with our private one.
Eric Schlosser, Reefer Madness
-
Do you know what the suicide rate is among "surviving" holocaust victims? Do you know any holocaust survivors? Do you know any children of holocaust survivors?
Your comparison may be apt, but you better get over the thinking that people came out of concentration camps feeling good about life.
That's right up there with Black people being thankful for slavery because it gave them a better appreciation of freedom.
-
Ok. I accept that you all think I am clueless and brainwashed. A WWASPie brainwashed success story. Ok.
I however will never admit to being that. Anonymous I didn't say it saved my life. It helped. And the fact that you'd like to say I'm clueless and I say the program can do no harm proves you're lack of using an open mind. I did say I am aware that abuse happens. As it happens everywhere else. Reread my first post and you will see you stand in the wrong with your false accusations. But if you wish to call me brainwashed and incapable of seeing the truth so be it. In the end that is your opinion in which you are completely entitled to having. I hold true to my opinion that I am a strong individual that took a challenge and used it to my advantage.
Antigen: I never saw any on my peers be abused. I heard of it happening though. Although I forget that what I see as abuse is not the same as others.
Alternativa: As a matter of fact I do know quite a few holocaust survivors and families.
And yes I was in CCM La Verkin, UT to be exact.
**************************************************
I wish you all good luck in achieving the results you want. Be it shutting the programs down or refining them to be helpful and not abusive. I will always continue to hold true to my opinions even if you all are in utter disbelief and hellbent to prove me wrong. Good luck. I hope these programs do get refined. They can do a lot of good and in that same sense do a lot of bad. I see it both ways. Coming to this forum has helped to open my eyes to the other side of the spectrum. I never understood it before. Now I have a better understanding. And 30 years from now when I am still successful and happy I will remember that there are those who didn't have it the way I did. My heart goes out to them.
**************************************************The reason behind the analogies (be it slavery or the holocaust) is to prove that humanity is stronger than we give it credit. That the human mind is a powerful thing. It can overcome a world of trouble. I believe that as a whole humanity has decreased in it's self confidence.
I believe that we take things for granted a lot of the times. Which I'm sure every generation could argue that their generation was just as rough if not rougher.
Again good luck. I admire youre strength and willingness to fight for what you believe is right.
[ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-03-23 03:41 ]
-
My act of "I'm strong. I'm self aware" is in fact reality. I have concrete evidence. I don't do drugs, don't drink, I'm honest, have a circle of well rounded friends (no they are not all program graduates), allow myself to make mistakes, have a lot of self earned money, an ever growing education, and most of all I am happy. How many people (program graduates or not) can honestly say that? A lot of times these days they may have a few elements but not all. By this I mean an example would be that an idividual could have a lot of money and yet not be happy. I know that the program is not a necessity for success in life. However, it was an AIDING element in mine. Think what you will. I am a proof kind of gal. Talk is cheap. It's about action, results, and consistancy. Act? You decide. To me all that matters are my results.[ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-03-23 03:45 ]
-
I understand and even agree that some kids on a self-destructive track benefit from being handled a bit differently from the way we handle kids on an average, reasonably healthy (for a teen) track.
I honestly don't know, Perri, if you *hadn't* been in a program, if just your experiences that you would have had in daily life, along with time to grow up, would have gotten you to a good place. Nobody can ever know that.
The problem with any treatment for any problem is that it's about numbers: how many people will benefit, how many people will be the same, and how many people will be harmed versus no treatment or some other treatment.
And knowing those numbers is only the *first* step towards responsible treatment of any human medical or mental health or behavioral problem.
The next step is: how do we identify the people who are being harmed by the treatment, how do we identify the people who are not being helped by the treatment.
It is a given that once you identify those people you discontinue that treatment and go to the next kind of treatment option we have, if we have one, or admit you can't do anything for them if we *don't* have one.
If you have an alternate treatment that's also more effective than a placebo, you go through the whole process over again with all the folks who didn't benefit from or were being harmed by the first treatment, and so forth and so on.
That's why I *don't* hit the roof whenever someone brings up the nasty side effects of various drugs. It's because I know that along with those side effect profiles come a list of warning signs to identify when a patient is first beginning to show signs of a bad reaction to the drug and get them safely off of that drug onto something else. If you had a drug for cancer that 60% of people would develop a penicillin-allergy-like rash to and die of, but 40% would be cured, it would *still* be a safe drug if you could watch closely for the signs of a bad reaction and take all those 60% off when all they had was a slight rash. You'd still have a 40% cure rate.
The reasoning behind that example is why I'm perfectly okay with a program methodology that is, hypothetically, disastrous for 80% but life-saving for 20%---IF AND ONLY IF we have a way to separate out the 80 from the 20 before any damage is done and we *do* screen them out so we only have the 20 taking the treatment and being helped, and the 80 get screened out and don't get hurt because we know not to give them the treatment.
My huge, ginourmous, deal-breaking problem with the programs is that they're run in a half-assed flying-seat-of-the-pants, dead-reckoning fashion instead of by the reasoned, scientific approach we apply to medicines or physical therapies or other treatment devices when we're treating people's problems.
By that I *don't* mean that the people running them aren't systematically applying some sort of method with some sort of game plan. They are, just like the pilot that navigates by dead reckoning *is* navigating--just not very well.
I have a huge problem with there being very few long-term studies comparing treatments and placebo-programs for these kids. I have a huge problem with there being little data to predict which kids will be harmed rather than helped by the treatment of being in a program. I have a huge problem with there being no safeguards to ensure that the kids we *know* are likely to have adverse outcomes from a specific kind of program don't end up in that particular kind of program.
It would be fairly easy to set up a placebo program. You set up the sleeping arrangements like a college dorm; the food like a college cafeteria, a regular class schedule; and a bogus non-therapy "therapy"---call it "art group therapy" and give the same group of kids the same time of day access to a room with art supplies and let them paint, draw, model, sculpt, whatever; give the ones on psychiatric care the same psychiatric appointments they'd get if they were outpatient; take them out outside or to a gym to work out on the same schedule as if they were taking PE in high school, plus the teenage daily equivalent of recess; build an allowance into the schedule for phone calls and let them use their phone allowance any way they want; do have the facility locked; do provide suicide watch in a section that works just like regular hospitalization to any kids when and if they need it--or even do the placebo "treatment" in concert with a local hospital and actually hospitalize them when they need it; leave them to clean their dorm rooms or not, to do their own laundry in coin operated machines--with a laundry allowance, and have cleaning staff clean the rest of the place, make the food, do the dishes, etc. This is basically, you're locked in a "safe" little mini-college and given benign neglect. No actual "treatment" distinct from normal outpatient care. A placebo.
Then you have something to contrast with any facility you want.
You could do it quite ethically as a federally funded study and offer the parents service in either facility at one fourth cost (with insurance perhaps picking up some or all of that) so long as they accept that it's random whether the kid goes into the treatment or the placebo facility.
*That* would be *one* way of fairly easily getting the data to start doing teen treatment *right*.
But nobody listens to me......
:-/
Timoclea
-
People do listen to you. It's a lot easier to take in what you say when you come from the purity of your heart. I see your stance. I wish that the subject of maltreatment and hard aftershocks were not at all abundunt. Keep talking. You are not alone in how you think.
-
I did say I am aware that abuse happens. As it happens everywhere else.
...then...
On 2005-03-23 00:35:00, Perrigaud wrote:
It's about action, results, and consistancy. Act? You decide. To me all that matters are my results.
Perri, I certainly don't think you're acting.
However, I don't think that the kind of abuse consistenly reported by former students of WWASP and similar programs is anything like what happens everywhere.
Your results and my results are similar. I've been relatively happy for most of my life. Never wealthy (not since I permanently pissed off my rich uncle when I was 14, anyway :grin: ) But relatively happy none the less.
I realized something, though, many years after the fact when I started talking to other Straight survivors and then to survivors of other programs (and survivor is a pretty apropos term, as the failure and suicide rate among us is extremely high!) I had a marked advantage over most of the other kids.
It wasn't just the mentally ill kids or the unusually weak kids who were damaged by the basic program. It was normal kids. I had experience w/ the particular kinds of pressure by way of my history as a younger sister in a Seed family. I was able to let a lot of things roll off that really effected other kids. I think that may be somewhat similar to your early childhood experience having toughened you up. Now, all I remember about your life story is that you were adopted from some very unpleasant part of the world. And I may have that wrong, but that's what I'm refering to, so just smack me and tell me to stfu if I'm out of line.
I don't think it goes so well for everybody else. And I also have this (probably overly maternalistic) concern for you setting yourself up as a WWASP poster child. Nobody leads a charmed life. Some are very fortunate, sometimes things go well, some people work hard and accomplish much. But into every life, some rain must fall, and that's the truth. Now, I don't want you spilling your guts in public every time something bad happens. I just wanted to say... well, you don't have to be perfect. Vain are the thousand creeds that move men's hearts, unutterably vain, worthless as wither'd weeds.
--Emily Bronte
-
On 2005-03-22 18:53:00, alternativa wrote:
"Do you know what the suicide rate is among "surviving" holocaust victims?
I didn't know anything about that. I do think there are very strong parallels between our society's scapegoating of youth, "drug culture" and non WASPs and that of the Nazis. I didn't know there was a particularly high suicide rate among holocaust survivors, though. I suppose I should have guesed.
Where can I read up?Janis, Jimi, Gery, Timothy... Did you HAVE to get so close to the edge to get a really good view?
-- Anonymous
-
Poster child? I'm not trying to be a poster child. I'm not getting paid for shit. Nor did I ever claim to be one. I don't like b/s I will tell it as it is. No sugar coating and no lies. I am simply trying to educate people on seeing things in all the light. Meaning all the ups and downs. All the positive and the negatives. Knowing one side isn't helpful. In life I try to know the whole spectrum.
I never claimed to be perfect. In fact I have even admitted to having downfalls. Be careful with assumptions. [ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-03-23 16:41 ]
-
Hey ashley. I finally found the forum! I am going to read the rest of what you said and write back
amanda
-
Yeh, they have a very high suicide rate. I've known a lot of holocaust survivors, but I don't know any who thank the Germans for improving their survival skills or giving them a new appreciation on life. I know a woman, who's around 80, and she got sent to Auschwitz when she was a teenager, and every time you talk to her, the conversation becomes about Auschwitz within 15 minutes. Kids from homes of holocaust survivors have no easy time either because the parents often still live in constant fear. I knew someone who had to call home every 10 minutes to let her mother know she was okay. I mean, literally, every 10 minutes. There's always this atmosphere of an impending catastrophe, an opressive sense of impending doom. People like that Yeats quote "Whatever doesn't kill you will make you stronger," but Yeats was a bit of a nut and also a drunk. He also believed he could raise the dead.
-
Oh, but I agree with you about the parallel. Adolescent behavior has been pathologized.
Moreover, expectations are higher for children these days, but society is set up less and less to accomodate them. Ironically, I found NYC a much safer and healthier environment than suburban CT. That's how I started checking these programs to begin with. I was looking for a place that might be beneficial to my son until we moved back to NYC (3-4 mos). He will still probably go back to military school, but he can come home every weekend and ride the train with his friends. Unless he can get his GED this early--in which case, he can get a job.
Personally I think that the demands of education these days are pretty much over the top as well.
Interestingly, all the major inventions of the 20th century were made by high school drop outs. Henry Ford only had a 5th grade education. Einstein also dropped out, and though the world might be better off without cars and the bomb--it's hard to dispute the ingeniousness of the inventions.
100 years ago a lot of "troubled youth" would have gone off to sea like Joseph Conrad, Jack London, or Herman Melville. One can only imagine where Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer would have been sent. And though Holden Caufield ended up on the analyst's couch--today it'd be tranquility bay. And then there's Rebel Without a Cause....
-
Um...sure Alternativa. Well fortunatly CCM was no where near to being a concentration camp. The holocaust survivors that I know have a grateful outlook on life. They always tell me to appreciate even the littelest of things. There are still some who are shell shocked. With good reason of course. Now, the program is not as bad as people make it out to be. I know plenty who have been successful and plenty that haven't been successful.
Military school. I hope it helps him. I don't know what he's done to be put in military school. I would not have made it in military school. Compliancy is easy. What I gained at CCM was the ability to think positively and see the world differently. Is it brainwash? I'm sure you will say it is. I say it is insight. Because of the "brainwash" (I say insight) I am happier. Military school would've just angered me even more. I needed to deal with my past, present, and issues. If I hadn't I would not be who I am today. Nowadays I deal with what comes my way. Issues are always going to be there. The differance nowadays is that I work through and with them. To me undealt issues are cancerous. I don't ever want to feel the way I did when I was 16 or even before my teen years. People don't deal with issues as much as they should these days (in my opinion). If they did there would be a lot less crime and negativity.
-
My son is an affectionate charming boy whom I can't keep in school, and the law requires I do so. Military schools (real ones, at least) require a certain degree of discipline--like you have to go to class, wear a uniform, and keep your dorm room clean for daily inspection. Other than that--it's really pretty easy. You can come home every weekend,bring back food and contraband on Sunday nights, you can have phones, computers, etc. They have real teachers whom you can talk to and parents can drop by the school any time. Dorm rooms are never locked--and anyone can walk out the door. The kids are pretty cool but you are right, they don't deal with issues. It's about academics and leadership. My son went last year. The experience didn't change him excepting he picked up a love of philosophy and he refined his ability to con people. But I didn't want him changed--I just wanted him to get through the 9th grade.
But I must say--this website has really opened my eyes. I am glad you are happy with your life and I am glad you are happy with your school, but all of you people who liked these programs sound uncannily alike. Ironically, the testimonials to the efficacies of these schools and programs are more damning than the testimonials that are meant to be damning. It's the same recording over and over and over again.
I am a parent who was considering a summer wilderness program and Ivy Ridge or something Creek in Montana were recommended. But those people are whack. Anyone who thinks I'm going to turn over my kid AND my money to a school I've never seen is a nut case. Then I came to realize they were all the same--these schools and wilderness programs--and all roads led to Utah. I think these schools are the scariest and most shocking things I've ever stumbled across in the American landscape. Okay, some are offshore.
I would like my son to finish school, but I don't want him to be a zombie. I don't want him spouting program drivel. I don't want him to be abused and humiliated and shipped off to God knows where for over a year. I don't want to go 6 months without talking to him. NO. I flatly refuse to even entertain the idea and I'm horrified that these schools even exist. This isn't to say I can't understand how parents get roped in--I do--but after being roped into progressive education and whole language reading, I'm not as vulnerable as I used to be.
There are no other wedsites like this about other types of schools. Don't you realize that? But you're right. I am completely closed-minded. I base my principles on the French Enlightenment, and I'm just not going to be convinced EVER that there are better principles than that.
-
the above was from me--i forgot to log in.
-
French enlightenment. Interesting. My parents are French. Anyhow, "you people" that's rich. No really. Us people huh? Ok, well you people are the same as well. "It's brainwash. It's child abuse. I'd never send my kid off to a concentration camp."
Different methods work for different people. The program helped me. It didn't save my life. I saved myself. School was never difficult for me. I rarely attended classes and still got straight A's. That is until they made attendance part of the curriculum.
If military school works for your son then more power to it. As for me I needed to deal with all my inner demons. I kept it all inside until I exploded all at once. Rape, death of family, death of friends, adoption, teen pregnancy, violence, and more are the issues that I hadn't dealt with. My mom tells me that she knew that there was something very wrong with me the day her brakes failed and we almost died. She was screaming and I never flinched. Didn't care if I died or not. That's a fear of most parents. I was dead inside. I didn't care if I died (I secretly wished for it). What became a problem was my taking it out on others physically. My parents were physically abused by me as well. But instead of divorcing me they tried one last thing. Would I be dead (you know the whole dead or alive thing?)? Probably not. Then again maybe so. Maybe I would've gotten worse and killed myself. Don't know.
Well all that "brainwash" ended up doing me a favor I guess. I'm more successful than people my age and older. I am happy. Again how many people these days are truly happy?
But you've heard all of this "jargon" before right? Of course you have. To me it's not jargon. It's a wonderful thing. Because I don't doubt myself or what I've been through what you say doesn't matter to me personally. However it does matter in a sense that people who haven't been through it themselves (I'm including the parents who had kids in the program) won't ever understand. They may empathize but that's it in my opinion.
There are teenagers who get through these awkward years unscathed and successful. But to those who are extreme cases I feel for them.
-
On 2005-03-24 01:58:00, Perrigaud wrote:
There are teenagers who get through these awkward years unscathed and successful. But to those who are extreme cases I feel for them. "
The fact is the vast majority of teens get through these "phases" without any major intervention. In fact, look how many people have been through these teen lock up facilities, then honestly try to tell me you think so many of us needed the "help". Even if the reports of physical abuse you find hard to believe. Can't you concede that accepting such large numbers of teens is an abuse of their power? These people are playing on scared parents fears and taking LOTS of money and locking up many children who don't need it. Is that not abuse? I know dogs at the boarding kennel who saw more sun light a day than I did. The fact is even if YOU needed the program the fact that at least 50% of the other children there didn't is abuse.
Oh I also noticed that when Alternativa mentioned you sounded so much like the other progam advocates you immediately started on how you were on you way to death....hmm are you trying to prove her right?
-
Ok, here's a story from `98. I don't know what, if anything, has changed at CCM in the mean time. Since good ol'e Kar insists (as he always has) that nothing needed to change, I'm guessing nothing significant has changed.
http://www.teenliberty.org/school_horror_story.htm (http://www.teenliberty.org/school_horror_story.htm)
It's hard to read due to an error in the page, so just copy and paste the whole thing into a blank document (Word, notepad or whatever) if you want to read the whole thing. Here are some excerpts:
The initiation:
When she first got to the school, Catherine said, she was strip-searched, then dressed in drawstring
pants and a sweatshirt, and given a thin mattress on the floor. She said she was watched all night.
"I never went to sleep that night. I laid in a ball and cried all night," she said. "The next morning, girls
came out of doors everywhere. They put on their uniforms, brushed their hair and didn't talk or make eye contact with each other. They called 'silence' and no one could speak."
Catherine said calling "silence" was a way the school kept the girls from making friendships. For the
first few weeks, she had a "buddy" who never left her alone, and every room was guarded by staff
with walkie-talkies.
Ok, so they're taking great pains to not allowe the girls to influence each other or communicate in a normal, spontanious manner. So where do they get their influence?
"I never believed in brainwashing until I got there," she said. "My therapist told me I'd been raped
and molested as a child. Over a period of months, he built this up in my mind. They had these
three-day seminars and put us in a room and told us all we had done wrong. Girls would bang
themselves on the ground, and say they hated themselves and actually believe it. I was in
therapy after I left this place because they messed so much with my head."
And the spin (what passes for balance in most of the media)
A Cross Creek Manor administrator tells a different story. In it, Catherine, rather than a victim, is a manipulator who mistook discipline for abuse.
Or maybe Kar is a self deluded manipulator who's been mistaking abuse for therapy for decades now.
for it is a truth, which the experience of all ages has attested, that the people are commonly most in danger when the means of insuring their rights are in the possession of those of whom they entertain the least suspicion.
--Alexander Hamilton
_________________
Ginger Warbis ~ Antigen
Seed sibling `71 - `80
Straight South (Sarasota, FL)
10/80 - 10/82
Anonymity Anonymous
Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps.
-
I very much recommend books by Primo Levi and Viktor Frankel.
Also a wonderful novel called ?Hester Among the Ruins? by Binnie Kirshenbaum
The following
Links will give you an overview and I?m sure you will find many comparisons to your own situation. Interestingly, 20%
of children of Holocaust survivors have PTSD.
Interesting parallels here
http://www.holocaustechoes.com/5robinson3.html (http://www.holocaustechoes.com/5robinson3.html)
suicide
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:4F ... sion&hl=en (http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:4FLQ4Fnc6rEJ:www.news.utoronto.ca/bin5/040202h.asp+holocaust+survivors+%2B+suicide+%2B+depression&hl=en)
Survivors guilt
http://www.holocaust-trc.org/glbsurv.htm (http://www.holocaust-trc.org/glbsurv.htm)
Forum for children of holocaust survivors
http://remember.org/children/children.html (http://remember.org/children/children.html)
holocaust survivors and children
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:Io ... ptsd&hl=en (http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:IoX7m4rRMQgJ:www.aaets.org/article96.htm+holocaust+survivors+%2B+ptsd&hl=en)
reporter from the Chicago tribune writes an article on his mother who has ptsd
http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/ ... &cset=true (http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/chi-031130reich-specialpackage,1,1540984.special?coll=chi-homepagepromo451-fea&ctrack=3&cset=true)
amnesia in holocaust survivors
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:q1 ... ptsd&hl=en (http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:q1LFfvLScAEJ:www.sidran.org/refs/ref1.html+holocaust+survivors+%2B+ptsd&hl=en)
-
I was just reading the conversation between Ashley and the annonymous person who thinks programs are "whack". I'm reminded of a story my Mom told me when I was about to graduate. My Mom had the hardest time sending me off to Cross Creek. She was really scared because she heard all this talk about how they brainwash you and all that. Plus she thought it was totally odd that she couldnt talk to me. She called my therapist like 30 times in 3 days demanding to talk to me or she would take me out. My therapist told her she could come down and see me anytime to make her feel more comfortable so she was off to Utah to basically take me home. She was so intent on this. When she got to Utah with her brother she went with my therapist to a room outside the courtyard to look at me and discuss things with my therapist. She said she was looking and looking until she saw this sad looking girl with her hair in her face by herself in the corner. Considering this is the precise description of me at home before the program she was convinced it was me. With her hopes of my improvement fading she turned to her brother and pointed me out. My therapist said, "Thats not her, that's her over there." She said she saw me and instsntly knew that the program was working for me. She said the dull glaze in my eyes from months of drug abuse and depression had faded and a new light was shining. I had a healthy glow and a lighter step. And I acutually walked without looking down constantly. She could see the confidence jusst beaming and knew that I had finally discovered that I was worth something. I was finally not afraid to be myself and live my life without fear of thinking others were making fun of me. And i actually cut my hair so i could stop hiding behind it. You know I hear alot of negative crap about the program but I tell you what. I don't agree with all the nitpicky rules. I didn't love every moment there. It was a challenge. A challenge I think most of you who hate it might fear more than try. No one has ever made me do anything. If that was the case and I was brainwashed then how come after i came home, I relapsed into a horrible binge of drugs and sex and alcohol? How come the success rate is so low? How come I've had to watch the friends I made there slowly relapse into meth and alcohol and all that? It's because it is a choice. It is always a choice. I was never taught anything other than that I am a deserving, honest and beautiful person. I NEVER believed in myself. i thought i was the most hideous person in the world. I cut myself. Drank too much. Smoked two packs a day. I smoked pot all day, not to mention the other drugs. I surrounded myself with people who expected nothing of me so it was easy. I never challenged myself in school, never went to school. And I was sad when I went away. I cried the whole way to Utah. But not because I was mad at my parents, or missed my friends, or missed being able to smoke. I was so sad that my life was this out of control and I had always known it. I knew it when I'd wake up in the morning and would pray to god to help me. I just wanted to be happy. I just wanted to try anything to not feel like I was worthless. And I knew that this was scary and I didn't know what to expect, but I knew this was the right thing for me. I'm not saying all programs are perfect or right. I just know that the one I went to was right for me. And I think it is unwise to make assumptions about this particular program unless you have gone through it.
Amanda
-
uH... Ashley? I was reading the end of your sentance about jargon. Ok. The program Jargon is kinda stupid but i have to say, sometimes when I'm in those moments (you know, the ones where you feel like something so bad has happend or is happening to you that you cant ever imagine being happy again) that I think of that stupid jargon and I am reminded that life isn't so difficult. Look at the AA saying "God never gives you more than you can handle." And guess what. Soon after I graduated the program, I didn't even say any jargon. It's just when your in a situation (AA, recovery program, ect) where you are learning about that stuff, you tend to use it alot and then when your around people who don't speak like that more often it goes away. Like with an accent. You still speak the language but you accent changes around different surroundings. And besides, if it helps countless alcoholics and drug addicts, desprate to survive the night without a beer or a hit, then who are you to criticize and judge a tool that helps them. Just because it's not how oyu talk dosn't mean its wrong or stupid.
-
"If military school works for your son then more power to it. As for me I needed to deal with all my inner demons. I kept it all inside until I exploded all at once. Rape, death of family, death of friends, adoption, teen pregnancy, violence, and more are the issues that I hadn't dealt with. My mom tells me that she knew that there was something very wrong with me the day her brakes failed and we almost died. She was screaming and I never flinched. Didn't care if I died or not. That's a fear of most parents. I was dead inside. I didn't care if I died (I secretly wished for it). What became a problem was my taking it out on others physically. My parents were physically abused by me as well. But instead of divorcing me they tried one last thing. Would I be dead (you know the whole dead or alive thing?)? Probably not. Then again maybe so. Maybe I would've gotten worse and killed myself. Don't know."
Where did I mention I was on the brink of death. I said I was dead inside. Please. Just proving that (Im sure not everyone ever gets to this point) I needed help. Therapy? Yeah I had fun lying to them and making stuff up. Hey Amanda glad you could join.
-
So now we have two WWASPies spewing their bullshit here. Interesting.
-
It's not b/s. It's our experience and opinion. I wouldn't disrespect you by calling everything you say b/s. Interesting you do though. It shows what kind of person you are.
Anitgen: Things have changed a lot since before I went there and after. I never slept on the floor. We had hall moniters but no one staff for every room. I wasn't strip searched either. But that's me it was different for everyone. Ask Amanda some questions and you'll find her views different than mine and sometimes the same.
[ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-03-25 01:14 ]
-
Perri, Amanda---I don't want to make the perfect the enemy of the good for those of you who were hurting and were helped.
I just want to make sure that the kids who wouldn't qualify for involuntary commitment at 19 aren't involuntarily committed at 15-18.
And I don't want to keep out the kids who are hurting whose parents can persuade them to go, so who go voluntarily and stay voluntarily. I know a lot of people here are on the other end of the political spectrum and don't like Rush Limbaugh, but him checking himself into rehab, for whatever reasons, is a fair model for voluntary treatment--for the kids who aren't immediate dangers to self or others (who, of course, would then qualify for involuntary commitment).
I just want to keep out the kids who don't want to go, and don't belong there, even though their parents are for some reason wrongly convinced that they do. Parents are sometimes idiots. I *am* a parent I know this. I can be a total idiot sometimes, and I sure know other parents who can be. There *needs* to be a professional check and balance on our judgement on something as serious as involuntary commitment of a non-dangerous kid.
And I want to keep the kids out who shouldn't be there because the particular program is all wrong for the particular kid's diagnosis and the problems that go with it.
I tend to harp on bipolar disorder, but that's because I can only speak from my experience and what *I* know. Behaviorist punishment/reward based behavior modification strategies don't work for bipolars and are really disastrous for us. It's the punishment part that does the damage, because often negative behaviors or failure to accomplish required tasks can be something that because of the disease and the particular phase of it the patient is in or her particular brain damage, the patient has no control over. When the patient has no control over a "bad" behavior or a "bad" failure to do a responsibility, punishing that lapse causes learned helplessness and breaks the patient worse instead of helping make his or her behavior better. And it's really hard even for an expert to tell if that particular time the patient had control over his or her behavior or not.
So with bipolars you have to work pretty much on *only* rewards, and they have to be pretty much immediate. Oh, you *can* allow *natural* consequences for lapses to get through, and you should---but you have to make absolutely sure that the particular lapse was under the patient's control, and you have to actually be right when you think you're "sure"---or you can turn a willing, bidable kid into a nightmare in a hurry.
And you can't hold up functionality as "success." Functionality is great if you can get it. Just like it's wonderful with a blind or deaf kid if you can fix that particular form of blindness or deafness with some kind of operation. But sometimes--actually fairly often---total social security disability is the *best* you can do with that patient and keeping them out of the hospital and safe in the world at least *some* of the time is actually doing *well* for that patient. And then sometimes you get a Ted Turner or a Jane Pauley who flies so high in this world it takes your breath away.
Cross Creek helped you two. Depending on how the rules and standards were applied to a particular kid, it could break them a lot worse than they were when they first showed up. Or, if the particular staff were particularly good at divining when a particular problem was out of the patient's control and particularly good or particularly lucky at stabilizing the kid on the right meds, you could get a *good* result. It's a *very* tricky disorder to handle.
All I want to see, and I know it's a tall order, is the kids that *don't* need to be involuntarily hospitalized, whose parents are being idiots for whatever reason, diverted into better options for that family. And the kids that *do* need to be hospitalized matched with the right treatment strategies and competent staff for their particular set of problems.
The *big* problem with the programs is few to no external safeguards to protect the kids from their parents' screwups or inappropriate admission to the wrong program.
And allowing the kids free external communication with the outside world through written letters would go a long way towards adding a fundamental safeguard for the outside world to recognize when a mistake had been made, or was being made, and fix it before any serious damage---or any further serious damage---got done to that kid.
Most kids are poor enough at actually getting motivated to write snail mail letters that the potential abuses or damages just from having outside communication access to anybody they wanted are *very* small. And the education value of the kids writing letters, however badly, is also a huge benefit. And the practice of written communication enhances spoken communication skills and enhances impulse control in kids that tend to speak before they think by forcing them to slow down---so they get *practice* at slowing down and thinking about what they're saying. In and of itself, letter writing, no matter to who, is good therapy for almost any teen emotional or behavioral problem.
Timoclea
-
Timoclea, one of the problems with WWASP is that that's the only form of communication allowed-- written letters, which are then read and censored by the staff. Free phone access would work much better, in my opinion.
-
On 2005-03-24 21:06:00, Anonymous wrote:
And besides, if it helps countless alcoholics and drug addicts, desprate to survive the night without a beer or a hit, then who are you to criticize and judge a tool that helps them.
But what if it doesn't? What if, instead of actually helping countless people, it actually only makes a few of them them dependent on the group, convinces them that it doesn't get any better than that while proving useless and harmful to most others?
That's what I hear from a lot of former steppers, anyway. And the numbers bear it out. Their stunning success rate only holds up if you consider attendance alone (not abstinance or moderation) and if you characterize roughly half as "stunning succes".
Again, I'm not any other poster but myself. I don't need for you to confess to haveing been harmed. Don't even want it. Am much relieved that you seem to have come through it all very well.
My concern is for kids who might get sent to a WWASP program based on their parents believing that your outcome is the usual story. I really don't think that it is.
All our liberties are due to men who, when their conscience has compelled them, have broken the laws of the land.
--William Kingdon Clifford
-
Timoclea,
You will see that both of us agree with you as far as the kids that are sent for no good reason.
Anonymous: You who has the audacity to call my opinions b/s. You who cannot show respect. I gotta tell you that that's quite the reaction. Niles and Antigen even Timoclea don't aggree yet they still show respect. You could learn from that. A genuine person feels no need to call other's opinions and views b/s. You can say it however bare in mind what it looks like to others. Good luck
-
Amada said
"I didn't love every moment there. It was a challenge. A challenge I think most of you who hate it might fear more than try. No one has ever made me do anything. If that was the case and I was brainwashed then how come after i came home, I relapsed into a horrible binge of drugs and sex and alcohol? How come the success rate is so low? How come I've had to watch the friends I made there slowly relapse into meth and alcohol and all that? It's because it is a choice."
This is actually what I'm trying to talk about.
You might not know it, but what you're saying is extremely common among people who have been in coercive TCs. Most do not do well. Many or most have problems afterward directly attributable to the method. For many, it's just a waste of time and money. The parents are happy for awhile. They've paid for and gotten the illusion of having done the right thing and of their child having benefitted. But it doesn't hold up for long.
But don't take my word for it. Just look over the people you know who have been through a WWASP or similar program and look over the medical description of PTSD.
Truth in matters of religion is simply the opinion that has survived.
--Oscar Wilde
_________________
Ginger Warbis ~ Antigen
Seed sibling `71 - `80
Straight South (Sarasota, FL)
10/80 - 10/82
Anonymity Anonymous
Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps.
-
Antigen,
You brought up another good point. A common reason why relapse occurs is because they have become too dependant on the program. They have a therapist at hand all the time. The worst that could happen is that they go to isolation for a few days. They still have food, water, shelter, clothing, and such. They may even drop a few levels. They have staff members and girls to talk to all the time. It's too easy for them to become dependant. That is one thing that the program needs to work on. I was told that this was a common occurance. This in turn motivated me to work my ass off to gain independance. I knew that once I was out I was out. If I screwed up the consequences were worse. I refused to become dependant on the program. When I went back to the facility to visit I told the girls that they needed to gain as much knowledge and prepare for the real world. We were all told to make a support system to help us when we went home. Otherwise we'd have a hard time and may relapse. So true. I was ready to come home and succeed. And succeed I did. Don't get me wrong I still made bad decisions. However, I worked through them. That is another thing I think the program needs to work on. Teaching the kids to be independant. Teaching them not to need 300 people, staff, and therapists around them at all times. Again, we were told to take in as much as we could because once we were out we were on our own. The girls that did succeed realized this sooner or later and took charge of their life.
-
Ok, this is to the annonymous person who wrote to ashley and me. It might take a while to respond because of the length of the response and Its harder for me to make a point in writing because I cant write as fast as I think so here goes.
I know you wrote that kids whose parents can pursuade them should go. But how many kids do you know at a teenage level are strong enough to admit they have a serious problem with drugs and should get help? I mean its even hard for 40 year old people to admit that even though those around them know they need it. I know because my mother in law is a serious drug and alcohol addict and needs help. But because she believes that AA or therapy wont work for her, shes been drugging and drinking as long as Ive known my husband, which is since high school and I know shes done it his whole life.
I know that you think alot of these kids have yet to hit rock bottom and therefore should not have to go. But I know that alot of the kids I knew there were not there for mere behavioral problems. they didn't just skip school, or drink sometimes, or disrespect their parents. they were drug addicts, sex addicts with multiple partners, told their parents to f#@% off every day and even were physically abusive to their parents, and there for needed and extreme form of help. Short term outpatient therapy did not work for them.
And trust me, any alcoholic or drug addict doen not want to go to treatment. Why do you think that is? Because they dont belong there? No. Its because they want to keep living the way they are comfortable living. They want to keep doing drugs, having sex, smoking ciggarettes, what not. There are people who understand after years of doing that to themselves that they might need help. But alot of people dont get to that point and by then they feel that its too late for them and they just give in to their addiction.
Also say a child isnt totally out of control and you choose not to send them to get help, and they end up getting worse and worse. What then? Say that program could have been something that could have helped that child. But when their 18 it's too late. then they have to go out and be ina an adult world and have no tools to deal with it.
You are right though. Parents have a responsibility to teach their children and communicate with them. But I know you must know that you can be the best mom in the world and do most everything right and your child can still turn out to have behavior problems and drug problems.
The program I went to had many different kids in it. Bi polar, add, depression, ect. Also there was an array of people with different issues. Rape, death of a family member or friend, drugd, alcohol, sex, co dependancy, eating disorders, physical abuse, ect. And some had many of these issues. But Iv'e never seen a therapist there who was unprepared to deal with an array of different issues. thats why they go to school forever. Becuase they are traind to help those with many differnt issues.
About the punishment reward thing. my friend Jules wants to work in a recovery program for her career. She has had 6 years of Colorado Colledge to prepare her for it. She went to work at this program for troubled teens where the idea was no matter how these girls treated oyu you were to always respond with positivity and no consequenses. They didnt really have rules and threw desks at her, called her a cunt bitch, a slut, told her to fuck off and were generally just rude and disrespectful. She said it was the most pointleess and ridiculous thing she ever did. So only rewarding and trying to always be kind in response to unkindness does not work for a pissed off teenager in alock down facility. Nad even in the outside world. I know no matter how many times I would throw things at my mom andsay I hated her and wanted her to die, she always tried to apologize and be kind to me. But I was so far gone that I didn't care. It actually made it worse, because I was so miserable and hated myself and distrusted myself so much that I didn't believe her or any one that tried to be nice to me.
And people with bipolar and other diseases have different therapy than I did for obvious reasons. And most of the people that had it were on medication to balance them out. But most of the time, Id say a kid knows the difference between righ tand wrong and just chooses the selfish choice even though they know the consequences.
So are you saying we are mearly able to function in society now? I think that is totally off. Not only can I function, I have self esteem, a subject very foreign to me before the program. And I have tools that help me on a daily basis to communicate with my husband and my parents, and with peple in general. The things you learn there are not just how to not do drugs or that stuff. They help you to feel good about who you are and have hopes and dreams for the future.
My brother actually happens to be completely blind. He went blind when he was 13 from a retina detaching in his left eye which over the course of 5 years and after 6 surgeries made him completely blind. We lived in Atlanta when that happend and my Mom knew that in CO there was the Deaf and Blind school. It was a live in school to help these kids learn mobility, sign language and all that. He went and now my brother has graduated with a 4.0 from the Univerdity of Colorado at Colrado Springs with a masters in teaching. He is an incredible person. Do I think he would be successful if my parents hadn't spen the money and time to move there and take him to that school? No. He would still be amazing but he needed more help than my parents could give him. I know the situation is different, but you arent helpless with kids with disabliltlies or mental disorders. It just takes a different approach sometimes.
To be fair to those "idiot" parents, they did try alot of different approaches before they sent their kids there. Do you think my mom was just like "oh amandas doing bad. Lets send her off wehre we are unsure if she will get better and spend a large amount of money." No. they sent me to countless therapists, depression medicaiton, antibuse, ect. I did that for 4 years, but the day I ran away from home after my parents caught me doing drugs was when they realized that wasnt going to work for me. Now if that works for othwr kids, more power to them. Right on! Thst means that those kids got better a different way and I'm happy for those parents and those teens. But not everything works for everyone and I'm glad many different treatment facilities are out there so the ones that work can work for many people.
Many of the kids that thoght they sholdnt be there were lying to their parents about the program. I know because I was there. And their parents took them out and now the kids are back to the same old stuff. When your so oppositional defiant, of course oyu are going to hate rules. Many of them had NO rules at home at all. They could do what htey wanted or they just didn't listen to their parents and disobeyed the rules. What a shame they actually had to follow some rules for once in their life. What a travesty! What abuse! I mean come on! Kids need boundaries and rules. If not their ego takes over ned they do what feels good. Any one who has studies child psychology or any psychology knows that! Without rules people do what they want, so saying rules are mean or wrong is just not accurate. Rules help a pareson learn how to set boundaries for themselves. And thank god i learned how to do that in a safe environment.
And trust me, in my program no one was being abused or mistrated. if anything it is those childrens parents who were being abused and mistreated by them. There was no physical abuse, no sexual abuse, nothing of that kind. If oyu consider setting rules and boundaries abuse then you are right. But I certainly dont think that stting rules is abusive.
-
But what if? I happen to know alot of alcoholics and addicts(being one myself and having gone to AA ALOT) and I know that it does help them. YOu cant argue with results. If it dosnt work for you, then dont do it. It is as simple as that. My therapist never told me I had to talk like that. I just did. it helped me. Have you ever heard of AA? It is a group of people who all have similar conditions that get together and deal as a group woith their issues. So yes, you do get "dependant" on a group. Well dependant isnt the right word, more like you use the group to help you. And I know alot of peopel with 40 yearws of sobriety under hteir belt that say it is a damn good thing they had AA and the group or they wouldnt have made it.
i dont think the success rate of AA has anything to do with need ing the group to survive. i think it has to do with personal coices and the fact that you have a disease called alcoholism that is a hard thing to recover from. And when you start to slip up, when you relapse it is usually because you dont want help anymore nad oyu dont care. Not becuase it dosnt work.
-
Have you ever heard of the word addiction? It is a strong powerful need to do something in excess. Addiction is so complicated that you can get help and do well and still relapse. It dosnt have anything to do with the program working or not. It has to do with the fact that drugs and alcohol(especially alcohol cuz its legal) are hard to escape from. Especially if oyu factor in that it can be a genetic disease. My family is full of alcoholics on both sides. I feel I have more of a chance of being on e than others becuase of that. But when I relapsed, it wasnt because I somehow realizes that the program didnt work for me anymore or something and the "brainwashing" wore off. It was because I made the choice to no longer talk to those who supported me in my life and started making friends with drugies again. And I stopped going to AA, calling my sponsor, sterted lying to my family and friends again, started to do shit I know was wrong for me. I know the whole time i stretd to slip that I had a choice and I knew what I was doing was wrong. But I didnt care nad I chose drugs instead. I actually have a concious now so I know when I 'm doing something unhealthy. I am ok now. And I know it's because of what I learned in the program that I didnt stay "out" as long a sI could have. I made a choice to stop and did it(with help). Now I'm not saying all programs are perfect. I'm sure that alot of them arent' But i know mine worked. I also know that alot of peopel want a solution to the youth drug and alcohol and sex problem, but are unwilling to work wiht the soulitions that we have (treatment programs) Society thinks jail is a much better soulition. DO you? I think treatment facilities work for people. Not all the time but would you take away a bunch of peoples recovery and happiness from the positive effects the program had on them just because a few defiant people who dont like rules complained about the program?
-
http://orange-papers.org/orange-interpreted.html (http://orange-papers.org/orange-interpreted.html)
The doctrine that you are "powerless over alcohol" is really bad, and has killed a lot of people. It is a formula for disaster that is often a self-fulfilling prediction. When people really believe that they cannot control their own drinking because they are powerless over alcohol, then they don't. They tend to go on prolonged binges, imagining that they have no choice in the matter. (Well, it sounds good when you are drunk.) The idea that you are powerless over alcohol and can't help yourself is an alcoholic's ready-made rationalization for taking a drink whenever the urge comes along. In one controlled study of A.A.'s effectiveness, court-mandated offenders who had been sent to A.A. for several months were doing five times as much binge drinking as the other alcoholics who got no such Alcoholics Anonymous "help".
http://orange-papers.org/orange-addmonst.html (http://orange-papers.org/orange-addmonst.html)
Fortunately for you, the higher you who is reading this, you are more powerful and more intelligent than base brain. You can over-rule base brain, and make it obey your orders. Base brain won't like it, though, and he won't make it easy. Base brain would like to get rid of you, just like a bad-tempered horse who wants to buck off its rider. But you can still win. You are not powerless. You are not powerless over alcohol, or your addictions, or any of that stuff. Quite the contrary, you are very powerful. You are much more powerful, and much, much smarter than base brain. You can fight the cravings. You can dispute the addictive voice that is alternately begging you and ordering you to drink or use. And the more you do over-ride the addictive voice, the weaker it becomes, and the stronger you become.
-
Are you an alcoholic "base brain" preacher? Have you had a serious addiction.
-
Convincing a person that they are "powerless" is a sure-fire way to make them powerless. This has been proven time and time again.
But, of course, that doesn't really matter to Perrigaud. After all, it's not in line with what she was told in her seminars, so it must be wrong.
-
http://home.earthlink.net/~mmales/yt-euro.htm (http://home.earthlink.net/~mmales/yt-euro.htm)
http://www.habitdoc.com/news.cfm (http://www.habitdoc.com/news.cfm)
http://www.habitdoc.com/habit/aaonly.cfm (http://www.habitdoc.com/habit/aaonly.cfm)
-
Anonymous: I'm not an addict. Never had a problem with drugs or alcohol. I was asking you a question and you couldn't answer it.
Is that all you can come up with? You don't even have any points except to mock me. How original and childish. Keep throwing your assumptions they only make you look rediculous. At least have the balls to come up with something valid or just keep doing what you are doing. I asked a simple question. One you couldn't even answer. How pathetic.
-
The deconstructive analysis of the 12 steps was at best a C-. Certainly the author could not be confused with Jacques Derrida, who was quite clear that all western culture and philosophy was logocentric--so obviously, AA would fit as another entity with the logos as its center.
That said, here's the problem with AA. Back in the day, it was a voluntary program--in fact, it was pretty much the only program that had any degree of success whatsoever. Courts didn't send people to AA. They only wanted you if you came on your own, and nobody came on their own until they were so down and out they couldn't stand it any more and were willing to do anything to get sober. Times changed. The rehab business began to flourish and AA became mixed into that. Rehabs and courts and behavior modification programs all used AA as a sort of core, doctored with psychology (talk about logocentric), reprogramming techniques, etc. etc.
But AA on its own is a very odd cult. It has no leader. It doesn't ask for money (ok--a dollar in the basket is nice), it doesn't exclude people or shun them. A lot of what passes for AA now is stuff from Hazeldon literature or corrupted interpretations. No one should ever be forced to go to AA. It's a waste of time. In fact, I'm beginning to think no one should be forced to do a damn thing they don't want to do.
-
Another thing anonymous. They didn't say anything to me about addiction or powerlessness. Nice try. You're just reaching for nothing and talking out of your ass. :wink:Have fun ASSumer.
-
Powerless ness over alcohol dosnt kill people, alcohol kills people. Alcoholism is a progressive disease. Just look in any psychology text and you will see countless studies on this subject. Trust me I know. i am a psychology major. And I have reaseerched the subject on neumerous occasions for projects and what not. Not to mention the fact that i happen to be one so I understand it.
And its not like AA says , "ok, you are powerless and therefore there is nothing you can do to help yourslef so why dont you just go and drink". They say you admit powerlessness and that your life has become unmanagable. And therefore you need the help. IF all i had to do was to just stop because I knew i needed to i would just stop. If that were the case, all of us could see something is bad for us and just not do it. Some can. But many of us cannot. We need to admit we need help and cant do it on our own. I know even though I dont go to AA all the time anymore, without my friends to talk with about these issues (sober friends, not those still using) I could not make it. I need a support group. And many others do too. I believe I have a daily choice of whether to drink or not, but I dont believe that I can change the fact that when I drink, I always drink excessivly and when I drug i always drug excessivly. i dont have a part of me like others that says ok this was fun to have one or two drinks lets call it quits. My brain says hey what do you mean last call? To hell with that! I need at least 15 more drinks to feel good. I know that I will always have a problem with drugs and alcohol. i cant believe that one day I will drink like a normal person or be able to take a few hits of a drug and be ok. i know I will always do these things in excess. And if you look at an alcoholic mentality, usually it is not just in the area of alcohol or drugs that we excess, it is in many different areas that we are excessive people. In relationships, in eating, in Tv usage, in working, we are always so excessive. I know I watch Tv too much, I smoke too many cigarettes, I eat too much sometimes. I have an excessive personality and I dont think i can change that. What I can change is how I deal with that excessivness> I can choose to give in to it, or i can choose to deal with is, acknowledge it and move foreward. Alcoholism is a constant struggle. Are you an alcoholic? Have you ever done drugs in excess? Had a true addiction? If oyu had than I would think you would understand that it is way more complicated than just "not doing it". YOu wuold know that everything can go well for you in your life and you stil have cravings for these things. That is why AA exists. So that when you have these cravings, oyu can go to a place where there are people that understand and dont say just dont do it anymore. I believe in the higher self, but anyone that believes that must know that humwan beings are imperfect. we falter on a constant basis, and anyone who says ythey have it allfigured out and have no problems and know how yto deal with everything life throws at them is lying. No one knows how to deal with everything. That is why we are searching for that higher self. it takes years to discover an enlightened self. It takes dedication and a lifetime. And I know that if I truly believed that I was in control of my life and I never needed help and things never happen for a reason, then my life would suck booty. Because its that exact mentality that screwed me up in the first place. I thought I knew motre than anyone else nad that I knew everything I did was right because I didn't listen to anyone. i ttried to control everyting and it all fell apart because I cant control everything. some things no one has control over. Like if someone close to you dies OYu may not have control over the situation, but you can control how you handle it. Aditude is a choice. oyu can have the shittiest life ever and still be a nice person. My husband has had an incredibly hard life and he is the sweetest man alive. Hes kind and gerneous and sweet. But he still has problems with addictions that haunt him and he chooses not to get help. So he stays that way and believes that it will not work for him. But he wont even try it. Now that is a true version of someone who feels powerless. You look for any reason you can so that something wont work for you so you just give up. At least alcoholics are trying something to help them improve their lives. At least they arent just saying I;m powerless so I cant do anything about it. Do you know how hard the alcoholics I know work every day to stay sober? They work on self improvement more than anyone else i know. They are constantly searching to be a better person and to spread that positivity to the world around them. That to me is a really incredible thing. I know many people that may not have addiction problems or anything, but they are still crap heads to others and to themselves. And they never try to improve themselves or love others. They are self pitying losers, who only spread negativity and fear. But the truth of the matter is, every person is different and no thing is right for everyone. It's like Christianity. I have a predominatly Christian family, but I'm not. I dont agree with many things about it, but I'm not going to go around and tell my Christian friends and family that the way they are doing things is wrong and that because I dont believe it that is the only truth. I respect them enough to let them believe what they want and actually I embrace the parts of Christanity that I think are right on and the parts I dont agree with I dont embrace. Its like with anything. You dont have to believe all of it is right to believe it. All Im saying is that it seems like you are a little bit judgemental about this without even going through it yourself. How can you speak so strongly about somewhere youve never been? Something youve never done? I would never go up to a veteran and start spouting off my view on the war they went through and try to tell them that what they did was stupid.. How could I know what that was possibly like? For instance my brother is in Iraq right now. I hate this war and its greed inspired nature, but I'm not going to tell him that. I support him in his decision to be there. He feels it is his duty. Same thing with my Christian relatives (back to that) Im not going to sit and tell my super conservative Christian brother his whole belief system is stupid, because that is what works for him and who am I to say it's wrong for him just because I dont agree? In the same respect, who are you to say that if a program works for someone that it is wrong? How could you know if youve never been or tried it yourself?
-
AA is not a cult. And to let you know, Aa is for the most part still a voluntary program. Yes some are sent there by court order, but all of the people I know who go go because they want to. and after 6 years of AA I can tell you thats alot of people. See you keep nitpicking certain things about these programs. They arent perfect just as the people who created them arent. But they do help and they are constantly shifting and changing to be better. I know when I went to AA alot much of it didnt have to do with the liturature. Yes it was a nice guideline and alot of the things in it are hel;pful. But the fellowship is why so many people use this tool. Because they can see they are not alone in this and they cna see they can do well because others there are doing well too. Guess what. Everyone has to do things they dont like. Boo freakin hoo. I hate paying bills but i do it. i hate paying taxes but I do it. I hate driving the speed limit but I do it. Well heres a good example. Say your theory that no one should do anything they dont want to was put into effect. How do you think humans would handle that? Do you really think people would still follow rules? Hell no! They would do what they felt like and we would have a society where people could do drugs in the streets, drink when they want to all day, beat their children and wives (or husbands) in public and there would be no consequences to their actions. Do you believe that we belong in a lawless society? In a ego driven world? Well for the most part, we kinda do, just becaus ethe peope who make the rules break them the most, but without consequences for their actions people could do whatever they felt like. OUr society has rules for a reason. Do I think all of them are vaild? Of course not. I personally believe that pot is not a very dangerous drug. time will tell, but cigarettes and alcohol are way more dangerous than pot and they are legal. Now in my perfect world people would be able to smoke pot as a recreational drug such as alcohol. Or if their going to make it illegal why not make alcohol and cigartettes illegal too? Dont they kill thousands of people a year, not to mention cause the economy problems because of all the health problems each of those drugs cause? But our society is hypocritical and apparantly needs these things so much that even their own governments cant stop them. I mean there are always rules we dont like, but I'm not about to go out and break them just because i dont like them. Soem rules are there for a really good reason. like drunk driving rules, and the speed limit, and even paying your taxes. Not that the tax money always goes where I think it sould go, but that it the system weve got. That is how we pay for schools and roads. So when kids dont like the rules of the program and think they are nitpicky, that rule may be dumb but its there for a reason. Like in the program girls used to plug the toilets just cause they wanted to, so they made a rule that you couldnt have more than 7 sheets of paper at a time, as that is enough for one trip to the restroom. If you needed more you could ask. Now that may seem dumb to you cuz not everyone isgoing to clog the toilet, but to the person who keeps cleaning up that mess, it means alot to them. So the rule wasnt there to torture us or anything. It was there so that people didnt have to keep cleaning up other peoples poop. There are many other cases in life where the rule may seem dumb but it makes sense if oyu think about it. Like how some schools have uniforms. Kids get way too freakin caught up in cloths and styles and even kill each other over wearing the wrong thing. So schools thaught that if you wore the same thing that would eliminate alot of the need to single others out for their cloths and maybe those kids would focus on school (What a shocker considering thats why they are there in the first place.) and less on what they look like. Now I agree that a person has a right to express themselves in their clothing, but those who take it to an extreme ruin it for those who dont. I think they will express themselves better when they arent focused on their image or looking cool.
-
I have no problem with AA. I have problems with people being forced into it. Frankly I think it's about the only thing that is effective--but not when people are forced.
Rules, zero tolerance, society has gone mad for conformity. FIne. It's all yours.
-
It doesn't appear that you bothered to look at the links provided in this thread. Bottomline- AA has a 2-6% success rate. Alcoholism is NOT a 'disease'. To affirm on a daily basis that one is powerless is not useful or therapeutic.
Educate yourself, or not. It's a choice.
A woman passed through my life for a time. I really liked her... except that everytime we were together she mentioned her 'disease', affirmed her powerlessness, and/or quoted from the Big Book. I personally saw nothing to distinquish her from rabid fundamentalists I knew. Same dogma, different 'church'. Church of the hopelessly powerless.
-
Ok, do you believe that a person will always figure stuff out on their own? Is that the case with you? Do you never need someone to point out to you something your doing that you may not see yourself that isnt working? I mean I know for me that is the case alot of times. Sometimes people have to kick me in the rear to get me to see htat something Im doing is not working for me. Sometimes I need a shove back into a positive stae of mind where I can ratianally think about something and so my depression dosnt cloud my ability to see straigt. And when people are court ordered to go to AA, they are not forced to do a damn thing. They could sit and listen to thir stereos all through the meetimg if they wanted to. They dont have to listen. All they have ot do is go and get the form signed. But I do know that some of the people who are "forced" to go and dont listen and just go cuz they have to are not doing so well. Like my sisters ex fiancee. He deffinetly has alcoholic tendancies and after he got drunk one night and told my sister he was going to kidnap her and his child and come over and hurt her, he was ordered by the courts to go to AA for him to be able to see his child. He refused to go and guess whaT- He is still doing the same stuff he was when that happened. He dosnt care that everything could be taken from him. he loves drinking too much. Who knows- maybe if he went he could have gotten a different perspective and sterted to change his life. Too late now. It is kinda funny that you think I want conformity. If anything, its the radical conservative Christians that live in my city that want that. I think rules are good. I dont think everyone should be exactly the same, but I do think that if something someone is doing is going to physically harm or kill someone else, than yes, they should have a consequence for that action. I know alot of people who have no rules or boundaries in their life and therefore are unhappy because of it because they dont know how to balance themselves. I think it is ridiculous to think that no one should ever follow any rules. That would be total Anarchy.(an extreme) Nor do I think we should live in a society where everyone is forced to do everything the way a person tells them to.(another extreme) I think a healthy balance of rules and freedom is needed. Alot easier said than done, yes, but I think at least on an individual basis this can be accomplished. People should be able to make their own choices but have to realize that with all choices come consequences. Some good and bad. Someone who is wasting their life on drugs and alcohol has more than just legal consequences too. Thier relationships detririorate. Somethimes their job suffers. Sometimes their school suffers. Their healt starts suffering. I mean yes they can make that choice, but why is it so bad to show someone in that position a better way to live. Your not talling them they have to, but your showing them that the way they always thought asbout themselves or others may not be accurate. Alot of it stems from self esteem issues. aAnd being sober and working on your life helps you to gain some back. So what is wrong with showing them that they dont have to drink or do drugs to be happy? That they dont have to abudse their mind and body to feel normal? That they can function in life and htat htey can be successful and that they are worth something. That seems like a good thing to me.
-
Last I heard the jury was still out on alcoholism as a disease or not; genetic or not. Statistics provided are meaningless. One thing about AA is that it does not prey on desperate people. The rehab business is booming as is the behaviorial modification business. As far as I can see--they're just moneymakers.
-
Like I said... you didn't read the links.
There are far more useful and effective ways to 'help' if/when the person desires help. It's unfortunate that AA is considered the primary, most times the only, approach to the issue. I was very disappointed to learn in my counseling class that alcohol/drug counselors must refer to AA. Why, If they know something else is more effective? I think it gained acceptance due to it's support of zero tolerance, because the stats certainly aren't there to support efficacy.
-
***The rehab business is booming as is the behaviorial modification business. As far as I can see--they're just moneymakers.
I think they are very similar. Most rehabs employ BM as well, including AA.
-
Your right. I didnt and for good reason. Statistics are falable, just like people. i believe in life results rather than what soem biased group says about a subject. you cant deny my results and the results of those around me. Say you like it or not, but actions speak louder than words. I have seen people fail yes, but I also see them come back when they need the help. it is the one thing in their lives that they can rely on the be there and to not judge them. You can argue semantics with me all day and we will never agree, but there are studies that say alcoholism is and isnt a disease. I believe it is. Are you an alcoholic? If not than I dont see how oyu can say it is or isnt a disease just becasue some studies say it isnt or is. The proof is in the pudding so to speak. When you are an alcoholic, you understand your addiction a little more than someone who has never been one. I know that I can never drink socially. And that helps me to understand that this is something I just cant do. Now that Ive had the experiences with alcohol that Ive had, I hate drinking and it isnt that hard for me to stay quit anymore. But I do have the occasion where i wish I could drink normally. But my results are the same with alcohol every time no matter how hard I try the self control thing. Now comparing someone believing in their program to a radical fundamentalist is a little extreme. When you are really a radical fundamentalist, you believe so strongly in what you think that you do everything in your power to change others into your belief system. Now if she was trying to force you to do what she was doing and believe everythign she believed without respecting your beliefs or opinions than she was wrong for that. I beleve though that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and if it works for them dont knock it. You can state your opinion but you cant say shes wrong for what she beleieves. If that is what helped her was to show you what she is doing in her life and talking to you about AA and what she believes about it than that seems healthy to me. Friends do that. Not all my friends agree with me. Actually it is quite the opposite on many levels. Religiously, politically, ect. We have debates about it but i never make them feel stupid or wrong for believing what they believe. its called tolerance. If I were beig like a fundamentalist than I would say you are stupid and wrong and ignorant. But I dont think thats true. I dont really know you so its hard to say why you believe these things. All I know is you have an extreme dislike and intolerance for my point of view and it seems you are unwilling to look at things from more than one perspective. Actually of all the people being intolerant and judgemental and self rigteous, it seem s like you are being more so that way towards me than me to you. i respect oyur opinion and would never say what oyu said was Bullshit. I think you are entitled to that. I also think that unless you have walked in a recovering persons shoes and have been through these things yourself, it is hard for you to really amke any rash decisions about what you believe about programs and AA and alcoholism. I mean deffinetly correct me if I'm wrong. I would love to hear if you have these issues and found some other way to live a haelthy life outside of treatment.
-
In case anyone is wondering this is my friend. She is another graduate. I invited her on this forum so you all can gain insight or even hear a different opinion from someone else. She has insight I don't posess. I am not an addict. However I do understand the basics.
Deb,
That is how far you can see. We have a different opinion. We see an organization that has helped. It didn't cure us we decided to cure us. However it did help. Do we agree with everything? No. You see, we know. [ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-03-26 15:46 ]
-
I believe you are right about one thing. If soemthing isnt working try soemthing else. if AA dosnt work than something else might help. I would hope that your professor wasnt suggesting that there are no alternatives to AA. And if they were than yes they are wrong. But if AA could help that person what is wrong with trying or suggesting it? Isnt it a tool just like therapy. I actually have afriend whos Mom just grduated to become a therapist and she is considering doing alternative therapy. More htan just the mental but the physical too. Helping people become aware of their physical and mental well being. I think thats super! Great! I think there are many ways to get help. But why knock a way that works for alot of people. When they say AAs success rate is so low, do they say anthing about the people that come back? That dont stay "off the wagon" so to speak forever? I mean how can you see the future. They may relapse now but who know whaqt will happen in a month? I knwo when I relapsed I didnt stay gone forever. I eventually came to my senses because of all Ive learned in my life and recovered. Thats why I say it is more complex than that. Statistics can only prove so much. Plus you dont know how many people they were taking into account when they did the studies, how many people were honest in the study. I knwo they didnt study me so theres one alcoholic unaccounted for in these studies.
-
Its funny you say that because there was an article in the local paper about how the rehab buiseness is NOT booming and less and less people are getting the help they need and going to jail instead. Yes the rehab business makes money. but that dosnt mean that the things that you learn about yourself in therapy and Aa and treatment programs are invalid. Medical care is expensive and everyone needs it at one poin or another. It may seem wrong to charge people the help them but you also must take into account everthing from the expense of paying for the hospital to the equipment paying hte doctors ect. I also know therapists that charge based on income and if you just cant pay they do it for as much as you can when you can. Can you imagine the dedicaiton of living that way? Try paying your bills off 5 dollars an hour. Now that shows compassion not a money makign buisness. Plus those hterapists spend uber amounts of money on school and have alot of dedicatin to their practice. They can charge what is fair. Now with a program, there are more expenses than just paying the therapists. Theres food, clothing, staffmembers, housing, electricity, heating, teachers to pay, ect. That cant be cheap. I do think it is alot of money, but for me I know I was worth it. And when I spend money on therapy now, i know its good for me and I dont mind paying for it. It s alot cheaper than paying for booze and cigarettes and drugs every day, let me tell ya! Plus I dont mind spending money on what will help me for my future na dmy well being. And that goes for alot more in my life than just my addiciton. I spend my money on things that I dont always want to like bills, but such is life. When it comes down to it Id rather spend the money on therapy than drugs.
-
***All I know is you have an extreme dislike and intolerance for my point of view and it seems you are unwilling to look at things from more than one perspective.
Excuse me... I have read your lengthy posts which espouse the same rhetoric that all AAers say. It's not 'new'. Did you bother to read the links I posted? No. Who's unwilling to look at more than one perspective. I'm very familiar with your perspective.
***Actually of all the people being intolerant and judgemental and self rigteous, it seem s like you are being more so that way towards me than me to you.
Odd perception.
***I also think that unless you have walked in a recovering persons shoes and have been through these things yourself, it is hard for you to really amke any rash decisions about what you believe about programs and AA and alcoholism.
I have, as have many in my life, and have never attended an AA meeting. The only AA meetings I attended were with the woman I spoke of. It went with the territory if you were her friend. If you made plans with her, she was sure to stop off at a meeting on the way to or from the destination. She knew where every meeting in town was and what time. I also went a couple of times with a friend at college who asked if I'd go with her. I've demonstrated ample tolerance.
-
***I would hope that your professor wasnt suggesting that there are no alternatives to AA.
It wasn't a suggestion. He stated that if you were an alcohol/drug counselor the ONLY acceptable/ethcial referral you could make was to AA. And that's what you'd do if you didn't want to risk being fired. Your friend's mom will not be refering to or doing alternatives if she works as a drug/alcohol counselor unless she is in private practice.
I don't know any therapist who works for $5 an hour and I have many as friends.
[ This Message was edited by: Deborah on 2005-03-26 16:59 ]
-
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."
People who believe it's bad luck to have a black cat cross their path don't believe in statistics either.
Neither do people who frequent professional palm-readers.
Neither do habitual gamblers in Las Vegas.
Neither do teenagers who practice the "rhythm method" of contraception.
Neither do people who answer chain letters.
Neither do people who take advantage of marvelous business opportunities that they hear about through email from Nigerians.
Neither do people who draw to an inside straight.
People who "don't believe in statistics" are what the con men call an "easy mark."
You are probably a very nice lady, and I'm glad you are apparently coping well with your life, but being math-challenged is almost as a great a disability in the modern world as being mad. It's something people can cope with--many people do. I just wish you wouldn't wave around not understanding statistics as if it were some kind of badge of honor. It encourages others who still haven't given up on math to do so just because it can be hard.
The only way not to believe in statistics is if you don't understand them. That's why I say you're "math challenged." At least about statistics, you apparently are.
Not everybody can be good at math. But understand that if you aren't, it's a difficulty you're working around and overcoming, not an asset.
Saying, "I don't believe in statistics" implies that people who don't understand them yet and find them a bit difficult oughtn't to bother with them anyway because they're useless.
*That's* what makes the difference between a Mark and someone who just has trouble with math. The Mark believes his lack is not a problem, the wise but math-ignorant man or woman *knows* it's a problem and is therefore extra careful of situations where that ignorance could hurt or allow people to take unfair advantage of him/her.
Statistics *matter*. If you don't understand them, you need to get periodic "reality checks" on the issues from people you trust who *do* fully understand the statistics *and have researched that topic and actually looked into those statistics*. The key questions with statistics are: who says so, how does he know, and is he pulling any of the common tricks used to present statistics in a misleading way.
If you can't tell that, that's okay----but instead of just writing it off, you need to get someone you trust who *does* "get" the math to check out the issue and tell you what they think, and then you need to trust their advice.
It doesn't help to take the advice of someone who is extremely sincere and trustworthy but doesn't get the math either. :smile: :smile: :smile:
Being an easy mark is not a good way to get through this life mostly unscathed.
Timoclea
-
Oh bother! Another religious debate over stepcraft.
If/when ya'll want to talk about WWASP methods, will you do me a favor and start a new thread? I really can't take yet another rendition of this discussion. (and I'm sorry for having taken the bait in the first place)
The question before the human race is, whether the God of nature shall govern the world by his own laws, or whether priests and kings shall rule it by fictitious miracles.
--John Adams, U.S. President
-
:flame: hi, im a grad of the program too, its too bad that you seem so stuck to your stats theory. regardless of stats, what really matters is its an option for users to get help, wether they recover or not. how old are you
-
Well, I am glad you were able to deal with your addictions without help. That is amazing and you are a really lucky person. I would like you to tell me what methods you chose to use to deal withyour addictions as I am interested in that. However. You do know that you can try something and have it in the back of your mind that it wont work for you and create the results you want from that. In other words, I could go to an AA meeting to say I am being "tolerant" and tryign something new, but if I know I hate it and know that it sucks, than all i would do is try to find any thing wrong with it I could so that i could prove myself right. I dont knwo if that is what oyu did with AA, but it seems like you are so opposed to it that that might be the case.
-
I never said I dont believe in statistics. I have no belief systems that spring from statistics, but that dosnt mean that I think all statistics ar phony. but I do know that statistics ar biased. I could look up something on the internet that would support my point of view just as easily as you can but that dosnt mean they are fool proof. Statistics are an indication that something is true, not a cure all. And since I think you will find any darn statistic you can to prove your point there is no reason for me to believe you arent being biased about this. And I really dont appreciate you calling me "math challenged". you know nothing about me and base this assumption on the fact that I dont believe that statistics are the end all answer. They are a tool and nothing more. I am not an idiot. i understand statistics, but for you to say that you have a statistic so it must be true and that statistics are more important than peoples actual results is proposterous.
-
Oh no, no, no. I did not go to those meetings looking for help, or to consider AA for myself. I went as a guest of my friends, and with the one because she couldn't go a day without a group. By that time 'excess' wasn't an issue for me anyway.
Look, when I hear about some method or technique and I can't wrap your mind around the beginning assumptions (ie.. helpless, powerless, higher power, etc. etc) I don't bother. That mentality is not for me... too much like organized religion.... opiate of the masses.
I was 'tolerant' of their choice to particpate in AA. Very tolerant.
There are more things in Heaven and Earth than you can fathom. Perhaps you will expand your knowledge base over time. And if not, you have something that appears to work for you. Enjoy.
-
Anon,
It might benefit you to slow down and read more carefully. I think your defensiveness is interfering with comprehension.
Tim said to find out WHO created the stats and what vested interest they might have... or something to that effect. So, you take the exaggerated stats of the Pros and of the Cons and somewhere in the middle might be the truth.
As for the AA stats... if you'd read the link I provided you'd know that those stats, on efficacy, were from the horse's mouth!! Not some advarsarial group.
-
Deborah
So now you are calling me aliar in so many words. Huh. That really seems like a person who is trying to have a healthy discussion. I am not attacking you so i would apperciate it if you would be a little less condecending and understanding. I get heated in a debate to but i dont try to belittle the person i am talking to. If you dont want to believe me about the 5 dollars an hour fine. i happen to know it to be true because my therapist charged me that becasue I am not the wealthiest person in the world. Im sorry your professor was a butt, but that dosnt mean that you have to be one to me about this. My friend mom is a private practicing counselor, and maybe if you dont like the way you have to do things in your particular practice than do something different like her, than you wouldnt have to only refer people to AA. And I have a question for you. Are you saying that there is no point in running programs or having AA if all the people who go there dont recover? Isnt it worth it enough for those who do? Are you saying that becaus it MIGHT not work for someone than thats that and theres no point to it?
-
Unfortunately, Ginger doesn't have a "Yawning" icon, or I'd use it.
I'm pretty much done with this interaction. You ask questions that have already been answered. That tells me that you are not interested enough in a 'discussion' to actually read and think about what others are saying.
You're way too defensive. And if AA works for you and others, more power to ya. For those who would prefer a less 'powerless' route, there are alternatives.
Was your therapists standard rate $5 an hour? That's how it sounded. I kinda doubt it. Most therapist do a certain amount of 'charity' work. It's kinda the ethical thing to do.
-
Ok heres the deal. YOu obviously think I am some brainwshed ridiculous child who dosnt understand the world and, apparently the universe, and therefore I believe this discussion about statistics and the program is never going to be understood from either of our points of view. When it gets to the point that you are patronizing me to make your point than I think we have gotten off track. I am interested in your methods of recovery. if you think I am too ignorant and stupid to understand them than that sucks. YOu act as if you know so much more than me. I think we would find that we both know alot about many different things. I just want to put out there my original points and those are
A) The program I went to (I wont say any others because I dont want to be presumptuous and spout out blather about somehting I know nothing personally about) was not abusive.
B)The program works for people so I think it is a good thing it exists.
C) Everyone is differnt and if something dosnt work for someone and they find a method that helps them change that than more power to them. i dont care if its AA, a treatment facility, religion, yoga, whatever. If it shows positive results NO MATTER HOW SMALL than it is important to those people it helped.
D) I think it is wrong to judge something like my program if you havnt been.
-
The statistics they are using have to do with people ordered by the court to go to AA. These aren't folks who just couldn't take another day of drinking and walked in the door voluntarily. I think AA is great for those who want it and are ready for it. I don't know what is "better" as far as alternatives. I only know who in my family is dead/alive; drunk/sober and AA had the biggest rate of success in my family--again--if it were on a voluntary basis.
I don't recall AA having a "zero tolerance" policy. But as I said, a lot has slipped in that doesn't belong there.
-
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=& ... ves+to+AA+ (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&q=alternatives+to+AA+)
-
Deborah,
You said it all when you said it's not for you. Great that didn't work for you and so you went and found something else that worked for you. But how dare you have the audacity to attack her on a personal level. Nothing in this world will be effective for everyone...nothing. For you to go off of statistics is your choice. However, I personally believe that there are a lot of people who need something else. Some addicts choose religion. That may not work for a majority of the group. Others may find it's simply about quitting cold turkey. Again that won't work for everyone. What people need to do is find what works for them. You don't know her. You have no idea where she's been. I enjoy a good clean conversation. However, when people like you throw in some condescending remarks it makes the conversation completely pointless. Aren't you a therapist of some sort. I wouldn't pay you a single penny to gain advice or knowledge if the way you represent yourself on a daily basis is the way you did on this thread. Bored icon? I would use one on you in a flash. People who pre-judge are weak. It's really too bad too because normally I don't mind listening to your insight. The threads name is "My OPINIONS".
Timoclea,
You've done it again. What was that shit about saying her not understanding math simply because she doesn't believe in them? Nice assumption. You were doing great up until that point. There is no need to attack and label someone you don't know. I don't call you socially inept because you are bi-polar do I? No. No use in getting personal. These are her experiences. Don't be so quick to come to a conclusion as to what sort of person she is. She understands statistics just fine. But she doesn't believe in them. Her opinion.
I am finding that it's so easy to attack what we don't believe in. However it is harder to understand it. It's interesting to see the interaction between the difference of opinions and insight. In the end I love America for having such a melting pot of people. What works for one group may not work for another. In life all of our main goal can be summed up to happiness. We all just want to be happy. We understand that there will be down days. Days that are horrific. Yet we all go through life learning and growing. There is something for everyone. What I do think is the downfall of man is that we have a hard time looking, listening, and RESPECTING each other's opinions and experiences if they differ from ours.
[ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-03-27 01:59 ][ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-03-27 02:04 ][ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-03-27 02:12 ]
-
Perri,
You said: But how dare you have the audacity to attack her on a personal level.
I have taken the time to revisit every post I contributed to this thread in consideration of your accusation. I didn't find any in which I attacked your buddy on a personal level. If you feel differently, quote what I said which you perceive as an attack.
Did they teach ya'll anything about debate? You know, where two or more people passionate discuss an issue with the understanding that you are attacking the THINKING, not the PERSON? That is what I feel I did. My guess is that both of you consider your THINKING (opinions) to be YOU. Therefore, when anyone critiques the thinking you take it personally.
***For you to go off of statistics is your choice.
Go off on statistics? I feel that is an exaggeration give that the only stats I cited came from AA and showed little efficacy, for the majority of people.
***However, I personally believe that there are a lot of people who need something else.
I guess we agree. That is what I have maintained is this debate re: AA.
***What people need to do is find what works for them. You don't know her. You have no idea where she's been.
Sweetie, I never once told your buddy she shouldn't attend AA if that works for her. Now, if she took MY 'opinions' about the methods of AA personally, not much I can do about that.
***However, when people like you throw in some condescending remarks it makes the conversation completely pointless.
Quote my condescending remarks please.
***The threads name is "My OPINIONS".
What does that mean Perri? Everyone who posts on this thread should defer to YOUR OPINIONS? Not challenge your opinions (thinking).
-
I will answer the reason I am concerned with the way I was sopken to.
"There are more things in heaven and earth then you can fathom."
Is that not patronizing? I could say the same for you but I don't because it has nothing to do with the topic we are discussing. it was not a comment about my thouth process. YOu were not speaking of my thinking. You were reffering to me and I consider that unnecessary and a very irrelevent thing to say. I dont mind debating but just dont talk down to me.
-
I think what ashley was trying to say about
"the threads name is my opinion" is that she is stating "my opinion" not "my facts". It seems like you believe that just because soe statistics say something that that is enough solid evidence to prove your point. But statistics are not solid evidence. No the end all answer. That was my point about them. When you state an opinion as fact than it is no longer your opinion. And When you said you wish you had a yawning mechanism on the computer becaus apparantly you feel there is noting more to talk abou tbecause you answered my question, I thought that to be a really immature was to state that. You really havnt answered alot of my questions about your opinion. You may have answered Perri or someone else, but not me. I asked you if you thought if the program does not have a 100% success rate than do you think they should just not exist? YOu never answered that and I would like to know. There is one example out of many. It seems like you wanted to pick out the points you wanted to from my notes and talked about it till it was exhausted for you. There are other things I wrote that you never addresed. I am always up for a good debate, but I debate with those who only attack my thinking, not me or my life. I would not sidetrack to make presumptions about you so I would hope for the same respect. Anyway I am getting very bored with this topic as well. that is why I asked that question at the end of my note to spark a new topic.
-
On 2005-03-27 09:06:00, Anonymous wrote:
You may have answered Perri or someone else, but not me. I asked you if you thought if the program does not have a 100% success rate than do you think they should just not exist?
We're not still talking about AA, right? Ok, I'd like to take a swipe at this.
Nothing in this world is 100% But we try to make reasonable risk/benefit evaluations. Doctors used to think that tonsils and appendixes were spare parts. They didn't know what they were good for, so they routinely yanked them out. We now acknowledge that they're there for some reason and only take them out if the reasonably expected benefit outweighs the reasonably expected risks.
That's not the way the confrontational TC model (the Program) is administered these days. Program proponants (not you guys, you're fairly reasonable and, I think, just starting out at really critically analyzing the issue) often make wildly unfounded claims. To listen to them, this form of treatment is both a profound, life changing experience and safer than smoking a joint. That is simply not possible.
Human beings are complex and young egos are fragile. You can't impose a radical treatment and expect profound changes w/o taking into account that some of the impact might be detrimental. If we were talking about real medicine, we'd use the term 'side effects'.
I don't think that the people providing these treatments or the people selling them, far less the people who have received them, fully understand how and why it works. And they don't seem too interested in any kind of fact based investigation or research. NIDA recently came out w/ a not-too-bad for what they had to work with study on the efficacy of just this model. Guess what? It's usually ineffective at best and often quite harmful. A quick look around these forums (where former program clients tend to hover like.... well, many of them are my friends so I won't say) will serve as a sample of long-term results.
Now, if these folks were more interested in finding out how and why their programs work and less interested in supporting their foregone conclusions, they would have been keeping data and doing studies for the past 30 years at least. But they haven't. Doesn't that make you wonder just a bit?
It (the Bible) is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies.
--Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist
-
"There are three types of lies: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics."
I always felt that this is a pretty thought provoking quote...
-
:lol: That was good.
When an organization states that their efficacy is 2-6%, I think that is significant and deserves consideration. Not 30 or 40 or 50%, but 2-6%.
The few people I know that 'it worked for' are dependent on it in the same way my mom is dependent on going to church to avoid burning in hell.
I love and appreciate my 'AA' friends and my mom, regardless of their beliefs. AA doesn't work for me, and apparently doesn't work for the majority of people. Fortunately, there are many options, provided that people can find them if/when they are desiring 'help'.
-
It is possible a lot of people end up in AA who are heavy drinkers but not necessarily alcoholics. they could be bi-polar, depressed or whatever and alcohol was the first thing to hang on to, in which case AA might be helpful but not the answer. There are too many unanswered questions about alcoholism. I think the definition of alcoholic got way too broad and it's gotten harder to sort out the heavy drinkers from the alcoholics==personally I believe there is a difference.
-
On 2005-03-27 10:43:00, Dysfunction Junction wrote:
""There are three types of lies: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics."
I always felt that this is a pretty thought provoking quote..."
People can only "lie" with statistics to people who don't understand statistics.
It's *not* an attack to say someone obviously doesn't understand the math.
If you don't believe in statistics, you don't understand statistics. Period.
Not believing in statistics is like not believing in gravity or the speed of light or lightning bolts.
You can "not believe in" gravity all you want, but if you jump off a foot bridge that runs above a creek, you're going to get wet.
Probability is fact. Empirical data is fact. The combination of probability and data is fact.
Just like gravity or lightning or the speed of light (which is not the same thing as saying it's exactly precisely constant, because mathematically there's no such thing in the Real World, but that's a whole 'nother story).
If you've ever run into a situation where that statistics were "wrong" then the problem was not that they were wrong, but that you didn't understand them properly. Or that you didn't properly check where the data came from and what kind of data it was and what inferences were statistically legitimate to draw from that kind of data.
If you've ever run into a situation where statistics were quoted to "prove" something that wasn't so, and it looked to you like they *did* prove that, that's not a reason to "not believe in" statistics---that's a situation where someone took advantage of your lack of knowledge of statistics to imply something false, where if you understood statistics well enough, you'd know the person was trying to pull a fast one and doing something mathematically illegitimate with the numbers. Or their attempt to be perceptually misleading simply wouldn't work on you.
There is no shame in not knowing or not understanding advanced math.
There is significant shame in "not believing in" advanced math.
The difference is that you can always find someone honest who *does* understand and *does* understand data collection and what it's legitimate to do with the different kinds of data to use the advanced math to check the facts *for* you.
If you just "don't believe in" advanced math, you condemn yourself and everyone you lead after you to ignorance.
That's not an attack. On anyone. That's just the plain facts.
We can't all be nuclear physicists. So what? That doesn't make us bad people, and it doesn't make us fools. The only thing that can make someone a fool is to get so defensive about the areas where they don't have knowledge that they tell the people who *do* have solid knowledge in a particular area that *they* don't know either, or that they don't know any better than you---in their area of expertise---when they *do*.
That's not an attack. I sure as hell don't know everything, and I am not going to kick myself because I'm medically challenged and don't have the skills and knowledge and understanding of heart surgeon.
Neither am I going to go out and say that I can't do heart surgery and I don't believe he can, either. I'm not going to go out and say that I don't believe in heart surgery just because I can't do it.
Statistics, done correctly, are *facts*.
They're as unavoidable and inevitable as gravity or the weather.
If someone feels attacked or feels someone else is being attacked over my saying reality is reality, then I just can't help you.
Do my social skills suck? Probably.
But reality is reality, not a personal attack.
Timoclea
-
I apologize when I'm wrong. When I say reality is reality, I'm not wrong.
I don't understand the theoretical physics that would explain gravity. To a large extent, the best physicists in the world don't, either. That's no excuse for not believing in gravity.
*I* sure as hell do not remember how to calculate even least-squares-method statistics. I do not remember how to do a binomial. I barely remember how to do a factorial, and I sure don't remember all it's used for, or even the most common things it's used for. I don't remember how to calculate confidence levels, or how to calculate statistical significance. I barely remember what a regression equation *is* and what it's used for---hell if I remember how to build one. I remember what a standard deviation is enough for rule of thumb understanding, but not the nitty gritty details of it. I *do* remember the basics of why the term "average" is so tricky mathematically.
I *used* to know how to do those things, and that former knowledge would make it easier to relearn them if I decided I needed to go check the facts on an issue that was of particular concern to me.
But unless your friend is a professional statistician, I'm fairly darned safe in saying she *doesn't* understand the math.
Yeah, well, she doesn't know how to do heart surgery, either. So?
The only thing wrong with not understanding the math is when you make the incredibly misguided leap from "I don't understand that" to "that doesn't mean anything."
I have *never* met *anyone* who understood the math of statistics who "didn't believe in them"---guessing your friend is *not* a professional statistician, or a college student who passed her second or third hard-core statistics class recently, or a math major, or a math grad student, or training in a *good* school to do research in one of the sciences----well, that's not a lot of a stretch. *Most* people are not any of those things.
Your friend is not being foolish by not understanding some very challenging math. Your friend is being foolish by pretending to herself that that math, combined with properly-acquired data, doesn't work.
And if saying that makes me a bitch, well, then, I guess I'm a bitch.
For an encore, I think I'll say that water is wet. :sad:
Timoclea
-
I guess that was a thought-provoking quote. Wow.
Anyway, I'm not arguing the validity of anyone's statistics here. I'm not familiar with what you all are discussing, although I do know that AA is, at least statistically, a failure.
That being said, let me pull you up on your logic. Statistics are, in fact, NOT FACTS. Statistical data relies upon the empirical gathering of evidence and the statistics are the mathematical derivation of that empirically gathered body of evidence.
Where we reach a sticking point is that statistics, in and of themselves, can be made to lean in whatever direction the author wishes them to lean. Simply stated, you need to investigate exactly from what premises the statistics are derived. If the premises are faulty, so are the statistics.
Maybe rather than pontificating on the absoluteness of mathematics and the righteousness of statistical analysis, you ought to hit the ol' philosophy books to understand that conclusions are only as true as their premises...
-
Oh, and for the record, as far as I'm concerned 98% of the human race, at least, is "math challenged."
Some of that could be remedied by placing greater emphasis on math so that people learned more and kept using it to keep the knowledge fresh and kept advancing their knowledge instead of hitting teen-something or twenty-something and just stopping learning.
Most of it will probably take the equivalent of an evolutionary leap.
People think, "Oh, I'm never going to use that," and maybe they're right---maybe they won't. But that doesn't mean they *shouldn't* use that. A whole lot of people's lives would be a whole lot better if they understood statistics well enough to make use of that better understanding in their daily lives. They'd avoid a lot of stupid mistakes, and avoid a lot of lost opportunities from being scared of something fun and not doing it, when the chances of a bad outcome are really low.
If fifty percent of people understood statistics instead of less than two percent, we wouldn't have a "war on drugs." In the first place, people voting for politicians wouldn't vote for insanely escalated legal consequences over and above the natural ones. In the second place, people thinking about using various drugs would understand the personal risk *to them*, given their other medical issues, of drug use and the people *most* prone to a bad outcome from using certain drugs wouldn't use them in the first place.
And don't get me started on other public policy issues.
Not understanding math, particularly not understanding probability, hurts most people all the time in their daily lives. It's a real hardship to almost everyone. It's just one that those people usually don't recognize to understand *how much* them and the majority of others understanding higher maths would improve their lives.
But most people *can* get a lot of those benefits secondhand by listening to the people that do understand that math. And what they don't know does hurt them. But since they don't see that either---it's like trying to convince a cat that a candle will singe its little whiskers off. You can explain all day......
So yeah, my social skills are a handicap. Understanding math is an advantage. I guess it pretty much balances out.
Now if your friend *is* a statistician and has valid reasons for thinking a particular statistical conclusion is being misapplied in a particular case, that would be a different kettle of fish.
Timoclea
-
On 2005-03-27 12:41:00, Dysfunction Junction wrote:
"I guess that was a thought-provoking quote. Wow.
Anyway, I'm not arguing the validity of anyone's statistics here. I'm not familiar with what you all are discussing, although I do know that AA is, at least statistically, a failure.
That being said, let me pull you up on your logic. Statistics are, in fact, NOT FACTS. Statistical data relies upon the empirical gathering of evidence and the statistics are the mathematical derivation of that empirically gathered body of evidence.
Where we reach a sticking point is that statistics, in and of themselves, can be made to lean in whatever direction the author wishes them to lean. Simply stated, you need to investigate exactly from what premises the statistics are derived. If the premises are faulty, so are the statistics.
Maybe rather than pontificating on the absoluteness of mathematics and the righteousness of statistical analysis, you ought to hit the ol' philosophy books to understand that conclusions are only as true as their premises..."
I do not buy the philosophical bullshit about empiricism not being a valid way of acquiring real information about reality. I've read quite a bit of it, and as far as I'm concerned, it's crap.
You *can't* make statistics lean whatever way you want unless you're breaking the rules of applying them, and you can only get away with that with someone who doesn't know better.
Actually, statistics are a statement about the portion of knowledge we have acquired about a particular thing. If we live in a deterministic universe, the probability of anything would be 100% if we knew everything about it. Quantum physics says some funny things about the limited possibilities as to what the fundamental nature of reality is that I do not understand, and even the people who do understand it think in terms of the math, not verbal philosophical translations of same.
But the portion of statistical knowledge we have about particular things *are* facts. Put another way, all of what we call statements of fact are statistics of one sort or another, when you get right down to it.
If your data is right, and the math you apply is correct and is applied "legally" for that kind of data, then what you've got out the other end is a fact with a confidence interval.
Timoclea
-
Tim
I have a question for you.
Say that there is a statistic that "proves" that 30% of teenage dinking deaths are from drunk driving. It isnt a real statistic or anything but hypothetically lets say that. Now say teenagers are educated about this statistic. They understand it. Do you think that the statistic would stop a teenager from drinking and driving?
The reasoni ask is because you say they would avoid alot of stupid mistakes if they just understood the statistics. Now anyone who is or was a teenager knwo that it is a difficult stage. Not just the physical level but on the emotional level too. i know alot of teenagers are not very rational and dont really think things trough logically. thats not to say all of them, but you cant discount the fact that horomone levels make you crazy and irrational somethimes. I really dont think that just because they know a statistic exsists that they will choose not to do something. i knew in high school that doing drugs on school grounds would send me to jail. i did it anyway though. ive heard tons of statistics about many things. Take smoking. I smoke. i know the chances of me getting cancer are higher for me because of my family history. i know the percentages of people that die every yrear from smoking. i know the percentages of people who have health problems because of smoking. but i do it anyway. It is an addiction. An irrational thing. People dont generally think when they are at a bar drinking that they have a so and so percentage of getting into a drunk driving accident if they drove drunk. I think soem actually might, but I doubt that would stop them. Most people are afraid of the helath risks or going to jail or both.
-
I know you're talking to Tim, but I'd like to take a shot at this one too.
On 2005-03-27 15:01:00, Anonymous wrote:
i knew in high school that doing drugs on school grounds would send me to jail.
This is an issue that I've discussed often w/ various ppl and about which I've tried to educate myself.
You're absolutely right that teenagers are at least half as crazy as pregnant women, menopausal women or men at almost any stage in life :razz: Part of our job as adults is to provide good guidance and a level head to help you avoid crisis and to have the broad shoulders when you land up in crisis anyway. I think the people involved in the troubled parent industry are doing a miserable job of it, making life much harder on the rest of us and, alarmingly, taking more and more control of public policy and funding.
If you're like most kids, what you knew in high school was not that doing drugs would send you to jail. In fact, you did drugs and you didn't get sent to jail. So did somewhere around (usually over) half of your fellow students. How many of them went to jail? I'm guessing very few. So what you actually knew about drugs and legal liability was probably that the adults were 1) full of shit and 2) dangerous people to talk to on the topic. Whatever other useful information they might have been able to tell you was not very credible and certainly not worth the risks.
So where else do kids get their information in that case? Usually from other kids or from "cool" adults, who may or may not have your best interests at heart.
That's part of the problem w/ spouting hysterical propaganda (about drugs or anything else) that is not based on reason and facts.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach him to use the Net and he won't bother you for weeks.
--Anonymous
-
Deborah,
Don't call me sweetie. That in and of itself is condescending. I never said you told her not to attend AA. You can't "wrap her mind around the assumptions"? What, you think she's too dense to understand? Please. Dependent on church or AA? No, how about that is something they want to do. Did the church brainwash your mother to attending and becoming dependant on them? Out of curiousity do you have any sort of weaknesses? Is there anything that you feel you are dependant upon at all? Do you feel that you are strong because you aren't dependant on something (should that be the case)?
Perception is key. Those who go to AA (not all of them) go because it helps them. They are not dependant on the meetings. They feel it's easier to talk to others who struggle with the same problem. People go to church to be amongst others who believe the same thing. A preacher motivates and guides them.
Humans like to be amongst others who think like them. Humans love familiarity. Hence cliques, political groups, churches, AA, Overeaters Anonymous, Al-Anon, Choir, Speech teams, Theatre, etc. etc. Are these people dependant on these groups? Not all, some are.
What did work for you as far as haulting your alcohol abuse?
**********************************************************************
Timoclea,
NOT BELIEVING IN STATISTICS DOESN'T MAKE SOMEONE MATH RETARDED!!! Just because I don't believe in drug abuse doesn't mean that I don't undertand it. Yes you are attacking someone. You are attacking their intelligence. If you really new her you would know that she knows and understands more about stats than you think she does. She has a member in her family that actually works with stats as a job. He's explained them to her thoroughly. She chooses to not believe in them. Again that is her choice. Here's another one of your shitty quotes: "If you just 'don't believe in' advanced math, you condemn yourself and everyone you lead after you to ignorance." What? That's rediculous. That's about as bad as me saying that if you go around using your bi-polar disease as an excuse for all your screw ups then your children will turn out to be excuse making losers. Horrible. Advanced math...please. I happen to be very good at math. I'm not a genius but math is one of my favorites and I don't believe in stats either. I have concrete proof I understand math. No I'm not talking just geometry or even normal college classes. In the end a statistic isn't gonna mean anything to an alcoholic or drug user.
Reality is reality. AA has saved and helped people. It may not have a 100% rating but for those it doesn't work for it doesn't work for. They in turn should find there own solution. If it means that they find it through god then good for them. What's the stat on that? Tell me, what is the most effective way to stay off of alcohol? AA has 2-6%. What has the highest percent?
"Neither am I going to go out and say that I don't believe in heart surgery just because I can't do it." Really based on what you said about stats you don't believe in it. That argument is total crap. Nice contradiction. If stats are in fact only understood by those who have mastered math where do you claim to know that they are the end all? Who are you to say that someone doesn't understand them? Do you? Not everyone thinks like you. I understand religion however I do not believe in it. Does that mean that I truly must not understand it? Your all or nothing attitude pertaining to stats is in fact, false. "There is significant shame in 'not believing in' advanced math" is another quote of yours that shows your true colors. What if I said that if you don't believe in religion then there is something morally and ethically wrong with you. That's not an attack its just fact. No that's crap. If you don't believe in religion then that's your choice. That does not mean that you are a bad person or that you have no morals. It's too easy for you to blame any outburst on your bi-polar disorder. It's too easy to accept the fact that your social skills need help. But if you're ok with it then I'm ok with it. That's your choice. I could blame a lot on my ADHD, ADD, and clinical depression. However, I don't. I admit to my faults and learn from them. I never use the excuse my ADHD and clinical depression. Those are two things I worked through. I don't suffer from them nor do I even blame anything on them. Depression (clinical) is supposedly a chemial imbalance in my brain. Yeah? Well I have that under control. I don't believe in those diagnosis.
-
Ahhh... The vigor of youth. I remember back when I was in college when everything was new and shiny and every class I took became like a religion.
I can remember taking my first Social Sciences classes and being absolutely convinced that Democratic Socialism was, and must be, the future. That Skinner, or Freud or Maslow (whoever I happened to be studying at the time) was really spot-on with their work.
Then something happened. I began to develop the ability to think critically. Once that happened I was able to distill my learning into valid opinions of my own that derived from source information, but did not DEPEND on it.
At some point in your collegiate career you will realize the futility of absolutism and will begin to understand things in a more well-rounded way based on more ecclectic knowledge.
Until then, you are going to exhibit truncated reasoning skills...
-
Maybe...then again maybe not. I see the world as an opportunity to learn so much. I am not only a scholar of college but also a scholar of life. I don't depend on anyone or anything but myself. As I go through this forum (apply this to life as well) I take what I think is valid and leave what is not. Absolutism. I see the many sides of any given situation. There is so much more for me to learn and apply.
It is my will that has kept me alive throughout the years. By alive I don't mean physical life. I mean inner freedom and inner peace. I have my problems for I am not perfect. No one is perfect. Nothing is perfect. If anything the world is perfect in its imperfections.
As I go on through life and encounter different people I learn. Be it directly or indirectly. Absolutism? You are under the impression that I think things are not able to be different. That ethics are the same for everyone and everything. Au contraire mon amie. In fact, I love that life is full of different things. That what method works for me doesn't work for others. I invite and applaud individuality.
I must admit I do enjoy your posts though I've only read 2. You seem very interesting.
-
Very nice, even-keeled response. Sounds like a healthy outlook.
Remember always not to be afraid of an intellectual paradigm shift. Change is healthy and invigorating!
Thank you for the compliment.
-
that was me, dys. j., btw. forgot to login...
-
I knew it was you. I've never seen you around till this thread.
-
On 2005-03-27 15:01:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Tim
I have a question for you.
Say that there is a statistic that "proves" that 30% of teenage dinking deaths are from drunk driving. It isnt a real statistic or anything but hypothetically lets say that. Now say teenagers are educated about this statistic. They understand it. Do you think that the statistic would stop a teenager from drinking and driving?
The reasoni ask is because you say they would avoid alot of stupid mistakes if they just understood the statistics. Now anyone who is or was a teenager knwo that it is a difficult stage. Not just the physical level but on the emotional level too. i know alot of teenagers are not very rational and dont really think things trough logically. thats not to say all of them, but you cant discount the fact that horomone levels make you crazy and irrational somethimes. I really dont think that just because they know a statistic exsists that they will choose not to do something. i knew in high school that doing drugs on school grounds would send me to jail. i did it anyway though. ive heard tons of statistics about many things. Take smoking. I smoke. i know the chances of me getting cancer are higher for me because of my family history. i know the percentages of people that die every yrear from smoking. i know the percentages of people who have health problems because of smoking. but i do it anyway. It is an addiction. An irrational thing. People dont generally think when they are at a bar drinking that they have a so and so percentage of getting into a drunk driving accident if they drove drunk. I think soem actually might, but I doubt that would stop them. Most people are afraid of the helath risks or going to jail or both. "
Look, *life* is a risk. People knowingly take certain risks because they think the enjoyment they get from the activity is worth the risk.
That's normal, natural behavior because you *can't* avoid all risk. Where ignorance of risk harms people is when they don't know the risks they're taking where that level of risk *would* make a difference to them, or where they wrongly believe the risks are a lot bigger than they are and so they avoid an activity---or needlessly worry about someone else who engages in that activity---because of their false belief in that inflated level of risk.
Knowledge of level of risk might not keep a teen from taking a drink, but there would be a whole lot more people doing their gambling in wagers with their friends and a whole lot fewer doing it with strangers or in casinos. A wager between real friends is a fair game. A wager between a gambler and the "house"---you might as well hand them how ever much money you were set on losing and save your time to go see a show.
Would understanding of risk keep people from gambling? Of course not. A bit of gambling is fun. Would it change the *way* people gamble? Certainly.
People already make their decisions on the risks *and benefits* as they understand them. Your analogy with the teenagers falls down because you ignored the benefits---fun. The kid *is* making a risk/benefits analysis.
Would your imaginary teen take some yummy, imaginary, non-alcohol drink that would be delicious and make him feel absolutely *wonderful* for the next 3 hours if he knew there were the following chances that in the morning he would be:
10% chance of puking. No?
30% chance of puking?
100% chance of puking?
You might. What about:
10% chance that in the morning you would be dead?
30% chance of dead the next morning?
100% chance of dead the next morning?
Teens are *already* making risk benefit decisions. Most of the adults who don't want the teens to make that decision are deciding they don't want that based on the risk to that *adult* of how he/she will feel if the teen gets hurt with *no* corresponding benefit weighed in----because the adult, not being the one drinking, doesn't get the fun of having had a drink or three with friends.
(Some) adults *say* the teen is not taking into account the risks when they really are---the adult is just not weighing in the benefits---unless, of course, the *adult* is the one in the bar. :smile: :smile: :smile:
Which is why I wouldn't have picked teen drinking as an example---except for *particular* teens who based on their own genetics have an exceptionally high risk of alcoholism or other really bad health consequences. If alcohol is a disproportionate risk *for you*, well, there are other ways to get your kicks.
There are other risk/benefit issues where people really would choose differently if they understood the risks and benefits.
One of those cases in point (to get back to where we started the discussion) being that people would probably choose different addiction treatment options--if they understood clearly enough how the numbers were obtained to actually *believe* them--if they understood how to tell from statistics what works and what doesn't.
I suspect that to the extent AA works over the short term it's because, like Deborah observed, it temporarily replaces the compulsive behavior of drinking with the compulsive behavior of going to meetings----the point being that the person is no better---they're still a compulsive. You haven't gotten at the underlying problem.
The only upside to AA, which is why I don't normally jump up and down bashing it, is that as long as you manage to sustain the substitute compulsion, well, at least going to a meeting doesn't trash your liver. *shrug*
Timoclea
-
Hell yes teenagers would still drink. Teenagers are well aware of what happens and what can happen. Hell yes they would still do drugs if they knew the probability of death, getting sick, getting in trouble, etc etc. Dare threw out stats and they were dummy proof. By this I mean they'd say i.e. 1 in every 3 people die of ecstasy.
People know gambling is of luck and not many have that luck. Stats don't mean anything to most people.
-
On 2005-03-28 05:01:00, Dysfunction Junction wrote:
"Ahhh... The vigor of youth. I remember back when I was in college when everything was new and shiny and every class I took became like a religion.
I can remember taking my first Social Sciences classes and being absolutely convinced that Democratic Socialism was, and must be, the future. That Skinner, or Freud or Maslow (whoever I happened to be studying at the time) was really spot-on with their work.
Then something happened. I began to develop the ability to think critically. Once that happened I was able to distill my learning into valid opinions of my own that derived from source information, but did not DEPEND on it.
At some point in your collegiate career you will realize the futility of absolutism and will begin to understand things in a more well-rounded way based on more ecclectic knowledge.
Until then, you are going to exhibit truncated reasoning skills..."
Well, you guys are busy telling me to get over myself, well, get over *yourself*.
I suppose I *could* go back to college and be a professional student for life, but I'm much too busy actually living mine.
Probability and advanced math are tools for understanding the world. When we combine them with data, we get the closest thing to fact it's possible for us to have. We get it in percentages with confidence intervals, but it's a signicantly more accurate way of knowing more about the world than anyone *else* has.
I've never known *anyone* who understood the math--or more specifically, who had ever sat down and actually done the math, even if the ability to do so atrophied through disuse later on---who "didn't believe in" statistics. And yeah, I've sat down and done substantial portions of the math, even though those skills have rusted away, a lot, from disuse.
Religion is a set of emotional hypotheses about the world and someone's place in it that are *designed* to be unprovable---so that they will also be unable to be disproved. Religion is a mishmash of wishful thinking, hallucination, and financial con game. The only "understanding" possible on religion is whether or not you've had the requisite hallucination, or convinced yourself you have, to become convinced you absolutely "know" something "in your heart."
It's not, actually, lack of a social skill to not suffer fools gladly. I *could* do it, if I chose to. It's a personality trait or decision that people I consider foolish don't like. It's a decision that people who value diplomacy more than I do don't like. Maybe it would be fair to call it arrogance. I don't know. All I know is that if I sit down and let a statement as manifestly stupid as "I don't believe in statistics" go by without saying something about it, I'd feel like a schmuck.
It's one thing to let a really foolish statement go by when it doesn't hurt anybody. I do that a lot, and since "foolish" is frequently a matter of opinion, I would guess pretty much everybody lets a fair few statements they think are foolish go right by without commenting on them.
It's a whole 'nother thing when a particularly foolish statement is the kind of statement that tends to spread, and be taken up by others, and tends to be the kind of thing that hurts people.
I see "I don't believe in statistics" as that kind of foolish statement---the kind that if you let it go by without challenging it, other people are tempted to pick it up and repeat it because it's easy.
This has nothing to do with being bipolar---notice that it's been several days.
This has to do with just plain not caring if you feel offended on this subject, or if your friend feels offended, when I say "I don't believe in statistics" is a stupid statement.
It's not that I generally don't care about offending you or others. It's that I don't care about offending you or others about this specific kind of statement, because I think it's the kind of idea that does a lot of long-term harm to people and I'm just not going to let it go by without saying something about it.
Think what you want to think of me. I'm not saying, on this subject, "Oh, I'm bipolar, *excuse* me." I'm saying that everybody has ideas that mean something to them, for various reasons, this is one of mine, and frankly, this particular idea means more to me than any level of concern I might have had over whether you or anyone else thinks I'm nice or not.
Everyone has ideas that matter to them. This is one of mine. Deal with it or not, just as you please.
Timoclea
-
Oh, and for anyone who can't tell the difference between criticizing someone's argument, their lack of knowledge, and certain opinions they hold and a personal attack, that's their issue, not mine.
Also, I never used the word retarded, and I would appreciate not having words put in my mouth.
I am not going to refrain from criticizing things I disagree with forevermore, or even for a little while, just because of having put my foot way down my throat before and having apologized for it.
I'm too old to expect an apology to make things okay with the person apologized to, but I gave it and I meant it.
That doesn't mean I plan to do penance by not criticizing arguments and ideas I disagree with. And if I think someone's statements reflect a lack of knowledge, I'll say so.
I expect other people will do the same with me.
Criticizing my social skills may or may not be accurate---when I'm at a social event or in a social situation, I socialize. When I'm debating the merits of ideas, that's *not* a social situation. It's a serious debate, and I don't and won't pull my punches in criticizing other people's arguments and I will not apply "social skills" to that kind of debate because they have no place in that kind of debate, in my opinion.
When discussing serious ideas, I give no quarter and expect none.
Personal attacks are criticizing one's ancestry, personal habits, character, and probable ultimate destination. Some would argue criticizing social skills falls in the realm of personal attacks, but other than this one statement, I'm not going to bother.
If someone thinks I'm ignorant of a subject and says so, maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong. But it's not a personal attack. In case there was a question, I'm calling someone's *idea* wrong and stupid, not them personally, and calling their knowledge of a particular subject lacking to the point of ignorance. There's a difference between having math explained, but not being able to do it, and *accepting the results* OR being able to do that math yourself versus having math explained that you can't do yourself and then shrugging it off.
Fine, don't agree with me, but that's my position on that issue, and I don't back down from positions on issue from mere social pressure.
If you mistook an apology for a prior screed of mine that did cross into personal attack for a lack of backbone on my part over statements that *don't*, well, you were mistaken.
This is not a party, this is not a chat with a neighbor, this is not a social chat room. I use social skills in *social* environments. I do not allow them to circumvent my backbone on serious debates of issues. Although *usually* I choose debate partners who know the difference, enjoy debate and discussion for its own sake and don't take personal offense or even get their feelings hurt when they're losing an argument.
On Fornits, it's kind of impossible to arrange so that the only people you're debating are people who like that kind of thing. Oh, well. Can't be helped. It means that discussing here I *will* run into people who don't know the difference. Or will take a different position on where the line is and what makes the line a certain place. Again, can't be helped.
But there *is* a difference, and I'm not going to let a past mistake where I *did* cross that line make me wimp out and apologize forever where I haven't.
Socially, I'm social. This isn't social.
On the difference between aptitude and knowledge/skill, Mark Twain said: "A person who doesn't read good books has no advantage over a person who can't read them." I'll take your word for it that you have math aptitude. I'll take your word for it that your friend does, too. That's not my point.
Religion isn't provable, what it substitutes for data isn't observable and replicable (except where it crosses out of religion and into psychology). Math is provable, sound experiments to gather good data are replicable. *Good* theories are constructed so that *if* they're false, an experiment could demonstrate that they're false. Or, if they're perhaps partially right, data from a good experiment can support them. That you can even put religion in the same class of things as science and math says something.
On the side of the guy wanting to imply I'm an undergraduate and immature, not ignorant, he's getting close to personal without going over. You're just plain getting personal, but in my book you get one freebie on the house because I owed you one. On the subject of what the criteria are for something that's knowledge and reason versus substituting emotion for same, I've had my say, I've made my point, I'm done.
And therefore I'm out of this thread.
Timoclea
-
Those who go to AA (not all of them) go because it helps them. They are not dependant on the meetings. They feel it's easier to talk to others who struggle with the same problem.
Now who is assuming?
-
Timoclea,
Wow that was very contradicting. But ok. I have made my decision. U judge when you say an idea is made because lack of knowledge. What's that you weren't attacking someone's intelligence? Bullshit. That is total crap. Need me to quote you again? I will.
Basically I'm dissappointed with what you said initially; "Anyone who doesn't believe in stats doesn't understand them" What? That still blows my mind. Had you said, "I think that anyone who doesn't believe in stats don't understand them" you wounld have started the debate off with owning your stance. In saying it the way you did you came off as it was factual when in fact it is purely opinion. Hmmm. Dysfunction Junction was right in his paragraph. We didn't say get over yourself did we. Who's feeding words into others mouths now? You are. Hypocritical. And yes you made the referance about social skills. I merely went off on what you said. Mind what you say. Bye, we were just merely going off of what you said. [ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-03-30 01:05 ]
-
So sorry to miss all this prolific and profound discussion in real time, but would like to play catch up. I want to go back to the beginning of this thread, I really have no interest in the discussion of AA pro or con, alcoholism, etc. I just wanted to post some of my insights. Since I have a child who was very recently in a program, I would like to say, yes, in some ways it has been beneficial to her. Shocked? Well, probably not helpful in the way you are thinking. Did it cause her to change her ways? No. Did it make her have a fear that she better not go too far or that could once again the alternative? Yes. Would she really ever be sent back? Hell No. But, she does know that we are truly commited to do whatever it takes to point her on the right path? Yes. Maybe you say this fear is not a good thing. I would have agreed with you in the past. Nothing else we ever did got her attention. We got her attention. She believes! I can also say that where she was that she was not treated well. However, she wasn't treated nearly as horrid as some children in these places are. Am I a good mom? Don't know. Will She turn out o.k.? Don't know. Will my son who has never given me a minutes cause? Don't know. Why? How can I? All I can do, is keep trying, and trying, and trying.
Perri, I don't like the programs. However, I have no problem accepting you and many others feel it helped/saved them. If you haven't been where she was, guys, you just can't say. You don't know her, you don't know her life story. I don't always agree with your opinions, but will stand firm in your right to have them. Get off her back. She is not over here trying to recruit you, don't try to recruit her. Congrats on the little one. You will do just fine.
-
Well of course the imaginary teen would! What better risk taking fun could you have than drin ksomething that woudl make you 100% dead in the morning! Teenagers are irrational and thrill seeking. I mean look at jackass. Funny but retarded if you look at how likely they are to be killed or permanently damaged. And they arent even adolecents anymore for gods sake! Now to address the gambling thing. Everyone I know who gambles does it for fun. They know the probability of them winning is slim to none, but its fun for them. I dont gamble because it hink its stupid to waste your money like that. When your poor like me any amount of money is alot so Im not frivolous wiht it. But soem people know the risks and still do it. Look at inhalants. There is a chance that you could die from your first time trying them. But kids do it alot anyway. I mean everyone I know who does or has done drugs or smokes or anything dangerous knows there is a chance they will die from it or get a disease or what not. Hell any one who has sex and isnt intending to get pregnant knows that no matter how much protection you use there is a chance of getting pregnant still. But people do it anyway. I think it is unfair to say an adult is only concerned wiht how it will effect them. I am a mother and I love my child with a love that is deeper than I ever imagined I could feel. I would do anyhting to keep her from harm, even in an dangerous situation kill or be killed. The love for a child is different. Ask any parent. We just want our kids to be safe and happy. That dosnt mean protecting them from all harm. YOu would have to keep them in a closet their whole life. Kids need to make mistakes to survive and learn but soem kids get out of control with dangerous substances. I mean its alot differetn when it is your child lying on a hospital bed in a coma from an overdose of heroin. It si different when it is your child dead form a drunk driving accident. Its easy to judge when youve never had a child permanantly harmed from drugs or alcohol and say they are wrong for their helping their teen.
That being said I think you are right. If the only reason you go to treatment is to stop drinking or drugging (AA too) than you are going to relapse. AA and treatment programs do not look at drugs and drinking as your main problem. they look at self esteem as a huge problem. Drinking and drugging is only a way to cope with a feeling when used in a n addictive manner. It isnt the main issue. The fact that trough these programs I have worked on myself physically, mentally, and spiritually I think is the reason why I am ok. I know that I turn to substances when i am not being honest in my life, when I am feeling worthless, when i am feeling bored, lonely, a miltitude of things. Therefore it is those things I work on not my drug problem. Alot of people may go to AA just to not drink, but those I know it works for work the steps and work on their "character defects". I know you cant deny we all have them. When we start to live in dishonesty and are not true to ourselves and are miserable and unhappy with who we are is when we turn to substances to make us have a sense of feeling like we arent those things. I think that makes alot of sense. I dont know many AAers who only go for the metings. they are constantly working on themselves and working to improve their lives. They just use the principles and take in a meeting when it is necessary. Meetings are not he only thing AA is about. They are a great tool, but they are not the reason it works. It works because you not only have a place to go to surround yourslef wiht people who understand oyu and who want the same thing as you, but you also work on the things that are making you unhappy. It is a much more indepth program than just going to meetings.
-
Dear Chi3- Thank you so much for saying what needed to be said. If you dont know what soemone has been through dont judge the situation. I hope that was interpreted right. We are all just doing the best we can with what we have. The program helped me. Others it didnt. But who has the right to say it is good or bad? Everyones experience there is different. It is so hard to say. But at least Chi3 has the tolerance and the integrity to stand up for what they know is true for themselves and not knock the people the program did help. Very well rounded post I think.
-
I think we all have, not only the right, but the obligation as adult citizens to judge whether these programs are harmful.
I'm glad you got something out of it. I got something out of my program too. I don't think I would have been able to make it all alone in the world, living it the slums, working shit jobs to pay the rent if I hadn't been toughened up by the Program. But then again, I probably wouldn't have had to, either.
Once again, people often (relatively often) turn adversity to advantage. But that doesn't make it a good idea to throw someone under a bus hoping for such a catharsis.
"Narcotics have been systematically scapegoated and demonized. The idea that anyone can use drugs and escape a horrible fate is an anathema to these idiots. I predict that in the near future right-wingers will use drug hysteria as a pretext to set up an international police apparatus."
--William S. Burroughs
-
On 2005-03-31 12:23:00, Anonymous wrote:
AA and treatment programs do not look at drugs and drinking as your main problem. they look at self esteem as a huge problem.
...and seek through well known coercive persuasion techniques to eliminate it.I think that all right-thinking people in this country are sick and tired of being told that ordinary, decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I'm certainly not! But I'm sick and tired of being told that I am!
-- Monty Python
-
CHI3,
I wasn't attacking Timoclea. I will not stand and let her make an attack on personal lifestyles. I'm all for debating and discussing topics. I will not let someone say somthing judging someones intelligence. I don't know what she's been through. You're right. I don't judge her.
We are all entitled to opinions. However, it's when people get personal that they cross the line.
I don't do that. However, if i have and don't realize it I apologize.
-
So are you trying to say that AA tries to eliminate self esteem? I am a little confused about that. I know it is hard for someone who is so intent on hating any program for drug and alcohol abuse that it isnt about brainwashing you to be a normal old citizen. Where do you get that it destroys self esteem to work on yourself? I always considered that to be a good thing. I am very confused. Please explain.
-
On 2005-03-31 16:27:00, Perrigaud wrote:
"CHI3,
I wasn't attacking Timoclea. I will not stand and let her make an attack on personal lifestyles. I'm all for debating and discussing topics. I will not let someone say somthing judging someones intelligence. I don't know what she's been through. You're right. I don't judge her.
We are all entitled to opinions. However, it's when people get personal that they cross the line.
I don't do that. However, if i have and don't realize it I apologize.
"
Let? :roll:
T.
-
Dang, I told myself I wasn't going to have to have the last word. *sigh* I suppose the whole lesson from all this is that Perri and I have more flaws in our occasional methods of discussion in common than I would have thought. Rather than saying just, "same to you plus double" like a little kid, I'll just say that the flaws that irritate us most in others tend to be the ones we struggle with ourselves. Q.E.D.
T.
-
I think on a daily basis we are put in a position to either have a positive attitude about life or hate everything. I mean bad things happen for no reason to everyone. Everyone handles it differently. Soem in an unhealthy way and some in a healthy way. I could get a medical bill for 3,000.00 when i only make 5.50 an hour at a part time job. now I cou8ld either whine and complain and feel sorry for myself and get nothing accomplished or I could figure out a way to pay for it and move on. Now I dont know what anyone else learned in the program but I learned that my attitude about life is my choice. i can either accept things or l;et them destroy me. I learned that I can overcome anything with a positive attitude and yes sometimes support. I think support groups are a great idea. And not just for alcoholics. For those who have lost someone, people who were raped. people who were adopted, Hepatitis c survivors, Ect. People need support am I right? It isnt just alcoholics who search for this but many peopel find it a good tool for many different problems. And hey if it works it works. Now advocating against the programs that dont work is a good idea. If it aint working fix it, but if it aint broke dont fix it. I know the program I went to was always changing and adjusting to best help the kids there. It isnt perfect however. but just because it isnt perfect dosnt mean it dosnt work. No recovery method is perfect because everyone is different, wouldnt you agree with that. I mean what is good for one individual may not be good for another, but it still worked for that person. So to say that the program I went to is wrong and dosnt work is not entirely true. it may be true of others but dont generalize abou tall programs just because you have beef with some.
-
Sure T :wave: [ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-04-01 04:54 ]
-
On 2005-03-31 17:00:00, Anonymous wrote:
Where do you get that it destroys self esteem
Well, the first step is probably the first clue. Admit you're powerless. Think about that command critically for just a moment. Then, in the context of the program, admit you're powerless or you will surely die drunken, smelly and alone in the world! Good grief! Does it get any more obvious than that?
Creationists make it sound like a 'theory' is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night.
--Isaac Asimov, Russian-born American author
-
On 2005-03-31 17:09:00, Anonymous wrote:
I could get a medical bill for 3,000.00 when i only make 5.50 an hour at a part time job. now I cou8ld either whine and complain and feel sorry for myself and get nothing accomplished or I could figure out a way to pay for it and move on. Now I dont know what anyone else learned in the program but I learned that my attitude about life is my choice. i can either accept things or l;et them destroy me.
What you're describing is a false dilemma. And Program language and ideas are just loaded with them. Either you could whine and do nothing, or you could pay the bill and forget about it. But there are many other choices. If you feel the bill is unjust, you can challenge it. You can negotiate. You may be surprised to find that, if you act in a timely and businesslike manner, most medical billing companies are happy to give you a reasonable discount when you point out that you'd still be giving them more than the insurance company would settle for, and all w/o any expensive collection costs. You could also settle the bill (negotiated or not) AND go further and educate yourself on the problem of spiraling medical costs and consider involving yourself in addressing the problem in some constructive manner.
That's what we're doing here. This involves discussing the problem, trying to identify the nature of it and possible solutions. If you want to call that whining, fine. But I think it's very rude.
Have you considered that system of holy lies and pious frauds that has raged and triumphed for 1500 years.
--John Adams, U.S. President
-
Ok you said exactly what I just said in so many words. i said you can figure out a way to pay for it. I didnt say you had to pay it all up front. I happen to know what Im talking about because I do have a medical bill over 2,500.00 right now and I did figure out a way to pay for it on a billing schedule. I am on a paymenyt plan. So you just reiterated what I said in a different way. I am not an idiot. Being under the poverty level has made me aware of how to pay for bills and negotiate with billing companies. So you were misinterpreting what I said. What I meant by whining was I could be all depress4ed about it and feel helpless and hopless. Alot of peple in that situation who make very little and support a family (like myself) feel that way. but I learned that it is ok to feel that way, but not to let it destroy yourself and not let those feelings create a fsense of helplessnes. And I dont think you understand what admitting powerless ness means. it means that this substance that you have no control over (what alcoholic do you know can control thier drinking?) you just cant ever get control over. It is a way to remind yourself that this substance has a power over you so you should stay away from it. Now you cant deny the truth and that is that people who have adependancy on drugs or alcohol have a problem controlling that. That is fact. If they could control thamselves than it wouldnt be a dependancy problem and they woldnt need a recovery program. people gop to Aa because they cant control their drinking. and it is silly to think that you can just stop. Go to a meth addict in their addiction and tell them to stop and see how easy it is for them.
-
Admitting powerlesness is not going to make you feel bad about yourself. Doing drugs and destroying your body is going to hurt your self esteem worse than going to AA. And the first step is a guideline. They dont say you will die a horrrible death if you dont follow the steps exactly. No one alcoholic in AA works the steps exactly the same as any other alcoholic in AA. Plus there are other steps. What is wrong with them? Having a higher power (which does not mean God it could mean whatever you want) helps a person to gtive up control. As humans we want to control everything in our lives, when the truth is things happen and we cant control anything but how we react to it. I think that is a pretty smart thing to do. If I tried to control everyhtining in my life i would go crazy! Sometimes you have to give up your contro and say it is out of my hands and i just have to trust myself to get through it and trust that it will work out the way it is supposed to. The steps help. When I went to Aa all the time I didnt do the steps the way everyone did. I also didint think they were the only thing I needed to do to get better. They were just tools to use if I needed them. OYU make it sound as if AA is a nazi organization that tries to make everyone that goes there into little molds of sober freaks. That isnt so. Everyone in AA is an individual and is unique. Everyone learns the same stuff but uses it in a differnet way for themselves.
-
The whole first step says "We admitted we were powerless OVER ALCOHOL, and that our lives had become unmanagable."
It dosnt say we admitted we were powerless over ourselves, that we have no power to change. It say s we admitted powerlessnes over alcohol. And that is what an alcohlic is. Someone who has no power over their drinking. Someone who has no control over thier drinking. You do have control over changing yourself though. You do have the power to help yourself quit. But you cant get to that point if you think you can still control your drinking. I think for alot of people who want to quit, they get to a point where so much is out of control with their lives and with their drinking or drugging or whatever tht they realize they need to stop and get help. Not just people who choose AA, but anyone who wants to quit has to realize there is a reason to quit. REmember the people who wrote the big book were alcoholics too. Not doctors or scientists or professors, but real alcoholics. They didnt write the steps with any degree or anything they wrote them to say this is what works for me and I hope it could help you cuz it seems to help other alcoholics like us.
-
Come on. We all whine about stuff now and again. And besides, I was adressing myself. If I was being rude to myself I think thats my problem. But yes, we all do it. And my point was whining dosnt solve anyhting. Coming up with a solution isnt whining, Im saying when you complain about it and dont want to find a solution, then it is whining, and people have a tendancy to do that.
-
On 2005-04-01 15:07:00, Anonymous wrote:
The whole first step says "We admitted we were powerless OVER ALCOHOL, and that our lives had become unmanagable."
It dosnt say we admitted we were powerless over ourselves, that we have no power to change.
Well who the hell keeps pouring the alcohol down your throat and wouldn't a simple restraining order of assault complaint do the trick? Or does the alcohol follow you home, sneak into your house and, of it's own volition, spike your morning coffee?
No, powerlesness in this context most definitely means powerless over your own behavior, your own choices.
But there are so many other clues. Like, for instance, you can spot a regular AA meeting place by all the sad sacks hanging around outside, compulsively chain smoking and looking like their dog, their dad and their best friend died that day.
But what else would you expect? The entire philosophy of AA is built on obsessing on acohol. You just replace an obsession w/ drinking w/ an obsession w/ not drinking and w/ focusing daily on blaming all your problems on what comes down to your own behavior and choices.
Necessity never made a good bargain
--Benjamin Franklin Apr. 1734
-
Ok I think your generalizing alcoholics just a bit. They are not all sad looking pathetic losers, which is what you make it sound like. Actually they are quite enjoyable and intelectually stimulating people. I find after a meeting is some of the most enjoyable times of AA actually. When you get the opportunity to converse with other people like you but not like you. I think its extreme to catogorize alcoholics like that. OYu can twist the 1st step to mean what oyu wqant but the fact is that alcoholics dont consider it to mean powerlessness in their whole life. And I think their view of it is definetly important. So why do you bash it so? If Im telling you that isnt what we consider it to mean than who cares what other peopel think it might mean to them. Just becaus eyou interpret it that way dosnt mean we all do. I guess that is just oyur opinion. I respect that, but I just dont think you are even open to considering that it means something else. It seems you are so convinced it is horrible that nothing I can say could help you see that just isnt so. And just to keep things straight, alcoholism isnt just a mental addiction, it is a physical addiction. Like ciggarettes. Who do you think so many people are so hooked on them? Yes it is a choice. YOu dont have to do it. But would you not agree that once someone gets into a habit (physical or mental) it takes a long time and alot of work to change that habit? And if AA helps change that habit, than what is wrong witgh that? Just because it isnt the method you might choose dosnt mean it dosnt work. That is such a silly thing to say. I mean I wouldnt say that just because something wouldnt work for me that means it is evil and wont work for anyone. if it helps someone to admit they have lost control of their drinkng and their life to stay quit than whats the problem? Sorry if it isnt worded the way you want it to be, but your interpretation is not the common interpretation of the first step. If you even considered that it mean s what I say it means, than woudl you be able to say it makes soem sense to admit that?
-
It is also a bit extreme to say the entire philosophy of alcoholics annonymous is built on an obsession with alcohol. Yes to an extent they talk about it alot. But it is aprogram bases on a persons addiction to alcohol and helping to stop that addiction, so what do you expect? That they will never address drinking in a drinking recovery program? It isnt all about a drinkhng problem, it is about working on the things that cause you to feel the need to drink. And if it works, than what is the big deal? I think tis odd you find it so wrong for someone to find a solution to their problem when you were just talking abou thte best way to handle a problem is to find a solutionthat work sfor you. If the solution of AA works for an alcoholic than what is wrong with that?
-
There are any number of rational reasons for someone to still be going to AA. For example:
1) They like the coffee
2) they like the people
3) they haven't had a chance to look at the research on its efficacy or lack thereof themselves
4) they think they've found a factor the research overlooked about why it would work for some, hurt others, and *look* statistically neutral when you average those groups together, but that they're in one of the "works" subgroup
5) their family members believe in AA and will get off their back if they go
6) well, I can't think of a 6, but there may be a rational 6 I've overlooked.
I don't really have a problem with someone, for example, thinking a black cat crossing their path, or breaking a mirror, or the number 13, is bad luck. Or being leery of those things personally.
I don't really have a problem with someone, for example, thinking eating purple jellybeans is gonna cure his cold and downing a whole bag of the things when he first gets the sniffles.
I really don't have a problem with the attitude of, "I just want to try it and what the hell, it can't hurt."
I do have a problem with people coming out and affirmatively saying that black cats or 13 really are unlucky and purple jelly beans really do cure colds.
There's a big difference in, "What the hell, can't hurt, *I* want to do this," versus, "This works."
Even when it's said as, "This works for me."
I don't really have a problem with, "I feel like this helps me, I don't know for sure whether it really does or not, but I feel like it does so I'm going to do it anyway."
I do have a problem with, "This works for me. This helps me," when all the hard evidence is that it just doesn't work.
For me, the admission that one *could* be wrong about whether it's actually helping you, but that for your own reasons, including *feeling like* it's helping you, you want to do it anyway---that admission that the objective facts don't support you and you're taking a certain leap of faith makes all the difference in the world.
"It helps me" as a statement of fact implies that it works and could help others.
"I feel like it helps, but I know I could be wrong" is entirely different---it admits that there are facts out there that other people might want to take into consideration in deciding what they're going to do.
"It helps me" is a testimonial.
"I feel like it helps, but I could be wrong" is a statement of personal preference.
That's how it comes across to me, and that's why one version of that statement punches my buttons and gets my back up, and the other version just gets me to smile and nod and think, "Cool. Ain't nobody's business if you do."
One statement *to me* tastes like fraud, and the other tastes like a simple personal preference about how to spend your time or cope with life or whatever.
I'm a writer. I deal with tiny shades of meaning in different ways of saying something all day long. It's what I do. Sometimes if I'm typing fast and don't proofread, it doesn't come through very well. :smile:
Anyway, those tiny differences in where someone's coming from make a difference *to me* in whether I find what they're saying irritating, or instead find it just a mildly interesting statement about their personal preferences.
That's just how the different ways of someone saying why they go come across to me.
TimocleaA man is accepted into a church for what he believes and he is turned out for what he knows.
--Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist
-
6) well, I can't think of a 6, but there may be a rational 6 I've overlooked.
Uh, they want the six month chip.... :grin:
-
One great thing about being a black-out drunk is that you get to meet "new" people every day.
-
T,
That's really interesting. You say you deal with shades well guess what. You just went against yourself. What about the (heck yeah I'm gonna bring it up again) "People who don't believe in statistics don't understand them" statement. That's is your personal preferance. Did you say "I think people who don't believe in stats don't understand them."? No. And then you have the audacity to lecture her about specifying preferance vs absolutism. That's interesting. Hmm. :rofl: [ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-04-02 06:44 ]
-
On 2005-04-02 06:43:00, Perrigaud wrote:
"T,
That's really interesting. You say you deal with shades well guess what. You just went against yourself. What about the (heck yeah I'm gonna bring it up again) "People who don't believe in statistics don't understand them" statement. That's is your personal preferance. Did you say "I think people who don't believe in stats don't understand them."? No. And then you have the audacity to lecture her about specifying preferance vs absolutism. That's interesting. Hmm. :rofl: [ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-04-02 06:44 ]"
Absolutism isn't wrong if you're right.
I have never in my entire life met someone who would make a statement as flat stupid---and it *is* a stupid statement---as "I don't believe in statistics" who knew how to (or had ever known how to) do the math.
If you haven't actually taken a college level course in statistics (and passed it) *OR* worked your way through the problems in the chapters of an equivalent level textbook personally, yourself, you don't understand them.
Just because someone's explained them to you without sitting you down and actually having you learn how to do the math doesn't constitute understanding them.
There are some concepts---like quantum physics, relativity, and Bell's Theorem (none of which I have personal understanding of)---that you *cannot* understand *except* in the language of mathematics itself---not the English language talking about mathematics, but the actual math itself.
If you haven't done it, you don't understand it, and claims to understand it are at best naive and ignorant.
Quibbling over shades of meaning again, you got all bent out of shape for my making a judgement about someone's intelligence and then (you thought) denying that I'd made that judgement. Frankly, I don't remember everything I said word for word, and I'm not going to go check. But to the best of my memory, what I said was that I would take your word for yours and your friend's *aptitude*. Ignorance and stupidity are not the same thing. But there is a point at which ignorance of a thing can become functionally equivalent to stupidity---and on the subject of math and science, "I don't believe in statistics" definitely crosses the line into that broad and featureless plain where ignorance might as well be stupidity because the effect is the same.
I'm not judging your or your friend's moral worth, or character, or the morality of your parents, or their state of matrimony, or your personal habits, or other details of your ancestry, or your membership in the species, or your probable ultimate spiritual destination.
I am judging her level of ignorance on a particular subject, and now, by extension, yours. And I'm fine with that. Too bad if you don't like it, rant all you like, I gave you clear opportunity to let it lie and *not* hear more of it that you didn't like. If you persist in picking at me about it over any post you find---even ones that have not a blamed thing to do with you, you will continue to hear things you don't like.
That part is entirely up to you.
Do you see concern in these eyes? :roll:
TimocleaIf people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for a reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed.
--Albert Einstein, German-born American physicist
-
By the way, Perri, if you're all that hot and bothered over not understanding statistics that someone coming out and saying you don't pisses you off so much, here ya go:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... ce&s=books (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0201775700/qid=1112455166/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/104-9901283-9054316?v=glance&s=books)
It's a little pricey, but textbook quality books tend to be that way. Has to do with the rising cost of paper.
There is so much knowledge in the world that there are all kinds of subjects I'm ignorant on. I'm a lousy chess player, forex. But somebody pointing that ignorance out, while it may sting for a minute, if they're correct and I *am* ignorant about that subject, it doesn't seem to bite my butt as much as this is obviously biting yours.
If it bothers you that much, buy a book and learn the stuff. Hell, that's what Amazon is there for.
Timoclea
There is no devil and no hell. Thy soul will be dead even sooner than thy body: fear therefore nothing any more.
--Freidrich Nietzsche, German philosopher
-
What in the world are you talking about? If it works it works. Perhaps the reason why you think it is imposible for AA to work is you go off only your rationality and not your heart. It seems you are so cought up in numbers and in your head that you refuse to look at anything but statistics and what would rationally work. How sad for you. The truth is it works for people. Alot of people. It may not work for those who go there unwillingly but for those who really want to stay sober, it works for them. I dont care what the numbers ona piece of paper say. I have seen the success first hand, today, this very moment. You cant deny the reallity of that. What are the peopel who are succeding in AA right now not considered sober to you or something? Why do you guys who are so against the program seem to always look for the bad in something good? Its like you totally ignore the good it can do and nitpick the bad to death so you can generalize and prove yourselves right. That is so wierd. And believing AA can work for you is not the same thing as believing in bad luck. Your comparing apples to oranges to try to make your argument look good. When someone goes into AA to try it and says what the hell, who could it hurt, thats what they say to begin with. Then if it works for them and they are staying sober 1, 2, 3, 20 years at a time, then they say it works for them. Makes sense to me. How can you say one is wrong for knowing something works for them? Are you in their head? Are you somehow connected to them and know for a fact wether it is working or not? I dont think so. So it is pretty irratoinal to think you know if something works for someone or not when your not them. I have said that AA dosnt work for everyone and if it dosnt work than they shopuld try something different. So you must not have read that or something. Now I could say It helps me but could be wrong FOR SOMEONE ELSE. That dosnt mean its wrong in general. If it works for many people, which you are convinced that these alcohlics it works for are lying or faking it or something, than why are you so bent out of shape? What is wrong with an alcohlic person gettign help that works for them? Please someon eanswer why you hate these people gettign help so much? YOu saying they shouldnt get help through AA is just as intolerant as someone saying they can only get help with AA. And thats not what Im saying. Im saying it works for alot of people, NOT ALL. And those it works for should have the right to not get hassled or stereotyped for getting that help. OYu guys dont realize this but you are contributing to the problem not the solution. You are so bent on tearing it down that oyu dont even care about the peopel it works for. If oyur so unhappy with AA come up wiht your own recovery program that works better, but dont try to take away something that works for someone else.
-
Can we please stop this madness about arguing over some stupid statistics? Look T you are right. They are a good tool. Ash you are right, they are not the answer to everything. So your both right now stop belittiling each other over something so lame.
-
Another thing that you said that dosnt make a whole lot of sense is
"I dont really don't have a problem with " I feel like this helps me, I dont know for sure wether it really does or not, but I feel like it does so I'm going to do it anyway."
What are you saying there? If they feel like it helps them than saying "this helps me and is working for me" seems a reasonable and real response. Alot of peopel are unsure wether AA will work for them at first, so of course it is ok to say they are unsure of the program at first. But if it is working and they are getting better, then what is wrong with stating that it works for them?
-
On 2005-04-02 08:38:00, Anonymous wrote:
Perhaps the reason why you think it is imposible for AA to work is you go off only your rationality and not your heart.
Yes! Exactly! I use my brain to make decisions. I know that would be deemed the sin of intellectualizing within faith-based circles. But it's really worked pretty well for me since I escaped those lunatics over 20 years ago.I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure.
--Clarence Darrow
-
On 2005-04-02 10:40:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Another thing that you said that dosnt make a whole lot of sense is
"I dont really don't have a problem with " I feel like this helps me, I dont know for sure wether it really does or not, but I feel like it does so I'm going to do it anyway."
What are you saying there? If they feel like it helps them than saying "this helps me and is working for me" seems a reasonable and real response. Alot of peopel are unsure wether AA will work for them at first, so of course it is ok to say they are unsure of the program at first. But if it is working and they are getting better, then what is wrong with stating that it works for them? "
The fact is, Druggie, that AA or NA don't work unless they have been preceeded by graduation from a world-class treatment facility such as the new, improved, all-ages, faith-based Straight, Inc.-by-the-Sea (formerly Straight, Inc. v2.0). Otherwise, these meetings and literature are wasted on the druggie or drunk in question. Why settle for a watered-down form of treatment? That's just a prelude to insanity, jails, and death. Only through Straight, Inc. can you make the necessary life changes to deal with your chemical dependency. That, Druggie, is certain.
Love ya!
-
The truth is you can have something good happen to you and sincerely *believe* it's for a certain reason---and be wrong.
Studies can be wrong when they say something helps, and sometimes are. They can be wrong when they say something harms, and they sometimes are.
Even though studies are sometimes wrong when they say something has no significant effects, in practice I find that this is rarely the case.
To put it in terms everyone is familiar with: Dumbo thought he needed the magic feather to fly; he thought the feather was helping him fly; he was wrong. He really didn't need the magic feather at all. He just needed to go ahead and fly.
I don't like it when people substitute emotion for thought. Substituting emotion for thought often has adverse effects on other people when whole herds of people substitute emotion for thought all at once and in the same direction.
A prime case of harm done by large groups of people substituting emotion for thought is when judges sentence people who offend under the influence of alcohol to attend AA meetings.
When that happens, it's not just *your* heart you're affecting anymore. It's not just you choosing for yourself something that is nobody else's business. It becomes *groups* of you leading others into situations where your substitution of emotion for reason gets forced on them.
When you say it works generally, instead of that you're choosing to do it because you want to even though you know the evidence says it doesn't matter, you become part of the herd of the irrationally, unthinkingly emotive that ultimately causes your misjudgements to be foisted on others.
Dance around a bonfire with a rose between your teeth for all I care. But when you *promote* it as a cure or treatment, and you aren't a relatively *isolated* irrational force, that promotion of it ultimately hurts others.
Not to mention defrauding people who listen to you and take your advice of their time and efforts by convincing them you've got an effective treatment when you don't.
I have a problem with that.
Substituting emotion for reason is fine and dandy when you're only affecting yourself, because you have to live in your own head. Your emotions are real and tangible things *within your own head*. It matters *to you* whether you buy the blue dress or the green dress because of your feelings about blue or green.
It is not okay to use your emotions, or permit them to be used, as an excuse for the forcing of the decisions of *other* people---because your emotions don't live in their head and aren't real in any head but your own.
I use my heart just fine---to decide personal matters for me. For my child, and when I do things for my husband, I use my best reading of *their* hearts.
Where I draw the line is at actions that inflict the decisions of my heart, rather than my mind, upon strangers as a matter of force.
(Matters of compassion are a whole 'nother thing, because accepting what's offered is a voluntary, free act on the part of the recipient.)
I don't have a problem with people's decision to go to AA. I have a problem with their evangelism of AA.
If it wasn't leading to force or fraud, I'd have no problem with their evangelism of AA, either, because it would be harmless.
But as it is, evangelism of AA is not harmless, and that's the problem I have with it.
I've recommended AA to people before, because even though it doesn't work over the long term, over the short term it--substituting meetings for drinking---may break the grip of alcohol on the person enough that they have time to find their own way to stay dry. *If* that's been studied and shown not to be the case, I don't know about it.
But somebody voluntarily doing that, ultimately taking it with a grain of salt, is a whole 'nother thing than presenting it so, well, fervently.
I don't think AA is *bad*---I just fundamentally think that people ought to, where at all possible, know the risks and benefits of what they're doing.
The risk with AA, to the individual, is the wasted time doing something ineffective when you could be looking for a solution that's effective.
Timoclea
-
Execpt you are forgetting one thing. Drug addiction and alcoholism are not a rationally based thing. They are if anything completely irrational things in themselves. It is as Ive said a mental and physical addiciton. You can comprehend the physical addiction, but understanding the mental addiction is alot harder. Yes everyone uses their brains to make decisions. Your still not understanding my point. And that is that like it or not, AA works for alot of people. Oh sure you can critisize it as much as you want. You can call it stupid or say it dosnt work but the fact is that it does. Not for all but for the ones it does good for them I say. What do you say to the rest of the post? I think it makes alot of sense to join AA if it works for that person. And you wont know unless you try. Wuold yo take away everything that a sober person in AA has worked for and their happiness and their sobriety just because you dont like AA?
I think I have a good example that makes sense to me. It isnt entirely the same but I think youll see the point.
Say we get the same food for dinner. YOu try it and say it is horrible. I try it and say it is the best thing Ive ever had. Whos wrong? I think no one is wrong in that situation. Just because I like it and you dont dosnt mean Im going to say you are wrong for liking it because we have a different palate. I would say the same for this. Just because it isnt nesessarily what you would do if you were in the same position dosnt mean its wrong for me.
I am not a person who looks at things from only an intellectual point of view, I can also look at the emotional side of it. I think it is very unbalanced to go too far one way or the other. I am glad rationalizing works so well for you but it dosnt work for everyone.
-
The fact is, asshole, that it works for me, and others who never went to a program in some far off remote desert somewhere. I have alot of friends who never went to treatment and are doing fine in recovery with AA. I cant imagine this critisizing drug addiction thing works very often when you are trying to sway one to your position. I hope you can understand that when you state someting the way you just did that it totally diminishes peoples ability to take you seriously and I hope you are not that big of a pompus jerk and were merlely joshing.
The "druggie"
-
So you think a judge should just say, " Alright. So heres the deal. You should drink and drive. K? Any more questions? Alright you can go now."
(included in this a quick smack on the hand and a pat on the head)
Do you think it is ok for a person who has a drinking problem wiht no intention to stop to be able to drive the streets drunk and kill you or I?
Jail is not the answer. Ive seen too many minor drug offenders and my own husband locked up for drinking and driving or possesion or what have you and I can sinserly tell you that it does nothing but rip the money our of your wallet.
However Ive seen some who go to AA and get help. And neeD I mention again YOU ARE NOT FORCED TO PARTICIPATE IN AN AA MEETING IF YOU ARE COURT ORDERD. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TALK TO ANYONE. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO LISTEN. YOU COULD SIT AND SING A SONG TO YOURSELF THE ENTIRE TIME OR STICK YOUR FINGERS IN YOUR EAR IF YOU WANT TO. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS SIT TROUGH ONE HOUR OF IT AND GET A PAPER SIGNED FOR YOUR PAROLLE OFFICER.
I had to capitalize because it seems you think that they force you to change in AA. That is flat out wrong. And many of the people who use alcohol a s an escape from their problems have never found a different way of thinking, a different way of acting. AA helps them see that you dont have to do the same old stuff youve always done and here is a different perspective. Embrace it or not, at least its out there. What would you propose they do? Just stop? Hah. Id like to talk to every addict an alcoholic I know and see if they could ever just stop. Many I know couldnt but I havnt asked all of them. So Ill take my own poll if you will and just see what I get.
Also people are emotional and intellectual beings. Are they not? I believe it is unhelthy to be too off balance about that. Saying no one should use their emotions is totally wrong. If we were only intellectual then we wouldnt be able to be human. We would be robots. So you cant deny what makes you human and that is emotion. Even animals have emotion and intellect.
And I still think it is odd you feel that AA is forcing something on people. It never says you must do these things or you will be killed. It says try it and if it works great. It actually says if you think you can control your drinking than go out and try some controlled drinking and if it works, our hats are off to you for doing something we couldnt do. But if not, than try AA and see if that works. YOu make people in recovery sound liek nazis or something! It does work generally. I say that because not all the big book makes sense to anyone person. YOu can pick what works for your life and follow that. That is what choice is. You have alot of information in front of you and you may not click with it all but the stuff that makes sense you use to your advantage.
Your still saying "forcing" someone to do something. In what page of the big book or any AA literature does it say "Follow the AA docterine or you will be killed." Is anyone holding a gun up to their head and saying they have to believe it? No, of course not! They are choosign to believe it because it works for them.
Since you are so convinced that AA is the devil, What do you propose we do to get help? Since treatment is out in your opinion, do you have a better plan? I hope you do if your trying to steer people away from the option they have. I hope you have an alternative instead of saying, "Yeah, AA sucks, but heres a thought. JUst stop! Its so easy! All you have to do is just believe you can do it and the rest is cake."
ANd I have a problem with people critisizing AA (which works for some people and you dont know if it could work for someone else) and trying to steer someone looking for help away from it considering it might be an option for them all because you dont like emotions and you dont like AA and giving up control. I think thats hogwash to try to tell someone, "Oh dont go to AA! It might work for oyu but look at these numbers! Geez! YOu probably wont make it so just dont try."
I understood that many people relapse after going home from treatment. I understood the numbers were low. But did I let that stop me from beinng sober? Hell no! It made me try even harder to work on my life so I didnt relapse. The numbers you post just help someone who believes in their recovery try even hareder to prove those numbers wrong.
For the most part peopel go to Aa because they want to. It is a vouluntary free act. The ones who dont go there voluntarily probably wont do well because they havnt hit their bottom yet. But at least they can listen to people who made a differetn choice and see there is some hope for them and see there is adifferent way of thinking other than addictive thinking.
AA dosnt advertize. Its actually against the rules to do that. It is meant to be a voluntary thing. YOu dont see sighns that say "come to AA and we'll fix all your problems." The way I found out about it was through friends of the program.
-
On 2005-04-02 13:03:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Execpt you are forgetting one thing. Drug addiction and alcoholism are not a rationally based thing. They are if anything completely irrational things in themselves. It is as Ive said a mental and physical addiciton. You can comprehend the physical addiction, but understanding the mental addiction is alot harder. Yes everyone uses their brains to make decisions. Your still not understanding my point. And that is that like it or not, AA works for alot of people. Oh sure you can critisize it as much as you want. You can call it stupid or say it dosnt work but the fact is that it does. Not for all but for the ones it does good for them I say. What do you say to the rest of the post? I think it makes alot of sense to join AA if it works for that person. And you wont know unless you try. Wuold yo take away everything that a sober person in AA has worked for and their happiness and their sobriety just because you dont like AA?
I think I have a good example that makes sense to me. It isnt entirely the same but I think youll see the point.
Say we get the same food for dinner. YOu try it and say it is horrible. I try it and say it is the best thing Ive ever had. Whos wrong? I think no one is wrong in that situation. Just because I like it and you dont dosnt mean Im going to say you are wrong for liking it because we have a different palate. I would say the same for this. Just because it isnt nesessarily what you would do if you were in the same position dosnt mean its wrong for me.
I am not a person who looks at things from only an intellectual point of view, I can also look at the emotional side of it. I think it is very unbalanced to go too far one way or the other. I am glad rationalizing works so well for you but it dosnt work for everyone. "
Of course drug addiction and alcoholism are rationally based things. They are based on concrete physical causes---or rather, I believe the available evidence is leading that way---that they are genetic predispositions that are waiting to be triggered in the people vulnerable to them.
They aren't based on the intellectual choice of the alcholic or the addict *but* they are based on the physical realities of his/her body and brain.
In this case, I'm not talking about the physical behavior of drinking or drugging not being a choice. I'm talking about the craving, once it's triggered, not being a choice. I believe it is absolutely true that an alcoholic or addict, at this time, is powerless over the fact that he craves alcohol or some other drug(s).
I also believe that it is only a matter of time before there are medicines that will effectively treat the addiction, and, eventually, treatments that will cure the damage in the brain to, as it were, *un*trigger it. Eventually, I believe we will have gene therapies to remove the time bomb waiting to be triggered in someone genetically predisposed to crave alcohol or other drugs to the point of compulsion.
I am bipolar. I have firsthand, personal experience with compulsive and obsessive cravings for excess. So many bipolars become alcoholic that some researchers believe some of the genes that predispose an individual towards bipolar disorder are some of the *same* genes that predispose individuals for alcoholism.
One of the differences is that it is probable that bipolar disorder is not caused by a single gene, but by an accumulation of the effects of several. On the other hand, there are plenty of alcoholics that don't appear to be bipolar. It may be more accurate to class alcoholism or other drug addiction as one of the many lesser diseases that cluster around bipolar disorder in the families of bipolars---where various family members may have enough of the genes (or a gene) to trigger one of the related problems, but not enough of the genes to predispose towards full blown bipolar disorder.
In any case, alcoholism is often comorbid with bipolar disorder.
Manic bipolars have one thing in common with each other. Excess. Their excess may be sexual, or financial, or chemical, or food, or some bizarre thing all their own. But excess is a common thread, and the excess stops when you control the mania. Alcoholism and drug addiction are, of course, more difficult to stop.
But in our manias, we all find outlets for that drive to excess.
Knowing the drive to excess can be chemically curbed in some of its forms convinces me that it's only a matter of time before we find a chemical curb for stubborn outlets for excess like intoxicating drugs.
If people walk around thinking AA is "the answer," they don't search as far for other treatments--treatments that would ultimately have a greater success rate than a placebo. AA is a placebo. Unfortunately, too many have mistaken a metaphorical sugar pill for a real treatment.
As for people court ordered to AA being able to daydream and not participate, if I was court ordered to attend a Baptist Church I'd be able to daydream and not participate, too, but it would still be a coercion, an offense, and a serious violation of my individual rights.
Some people don't give a rip about these kinds of right of other people. They ignore the truth that for many of the people violated in this way that it's a very big deal. That's the problem with using your heart as an excuse to do unto others. It often involves running roughshod over *their* hearts.
Would I deprive people benefitting from the placebo effect of their chosen placebo?
No, not directly.
But if telling them it's a placebo---if shouting that from the metaphorical rooftops---would lead to research that will provide *effective*, medical treatments, then for sure I'd do it. And it might, so I will and am.
I come from a bipolar family. Alcoholism is a risk for us. That gives me a personal stake for my child, and her children, and her children's children and on down the generations in someone developing those effective treatments and ultimate cure.
Your emotions are real things to you. Others' emotions are real things to them, but yours aren't real things (neither are theirs) once any of you get outside your own head.
There's no excuse for using your emotions to decide things for others. And even if it happens at second or third hand, we each have a moral obligation to at least *try* to keep it from happening.
AA is your moral and religious position. Classical liberalism combined with logical empiricism is mine. You're preaching your gospel. Basically all I'm doing is responding in kind.
I think you're foolish. You quite obviously think I'm cold. Oh, well.
Timoclea
-
Oh, on drunk driving---I've advocated, for many years, that people convicted of DUI should have a red band put across their drivers' license or alternate state ID and that it should be a crime to sell or serve alcohol to someone with a red band on his or her license or ID.
I *also* believe in jail time for DUIs, but nothing really works other than them stopping drinking.
A red band would just drive the driving alcoholics to a black market, *but* the fear of getting a red band might make people who love their drink more disposed to go for their drinking someplace where they won't be tempted to drive afterwards.
Yes, I know it seems like another wrinkle to the drug war and a return to prohibition. The difference is that DUI is not a victimless activity. It's on the order of the difference between masturbating in your bedroom in private versus in front of the kiddies in a public park.
I've *never* been a fan of "don't just stand there do something!" where even something completely ineffective is somehow preferred over stopping and pursuing effective solutions or just admitting you don't have the will to pursue them.
The red band would be *partially* effective at reducing drunk driving. First offense you lose your right to drink. Second offense you lose your right to drive. Third offense you get locked up in a mental ward that doesn't bother with ineffective treatments or behavior mods, it just warehouses you in quarantine and tries to make your stay as comfortable as possible, considering its involuntary nature. And, of course, you let the third offensers out once there's an effective treatment or cure, contingent on their taking it.
*That's* what I'd do about drunk driving. But nobody asked me.
Actually, since some one offense drunk drivers aren't alcoholics, they're just being stupid and reckless, I'd consider it a win if the first offense was to lose the right to drink for a year and then go on to the other three escalating penalties on the second through fourth offenses.
But that's just me.
Timoclea
-
Oooh. I just saw the line, "...I have a problem with people criticizing AA...."
Your lack of indentation or blank lines separating paragraphs makes your posts take unusual effort to follow.
Along the lines of accepting with serenity the things you cannot change, you might as well do that about the criticism of AA.
There will always be people who criticize everything, but there will especially be people who criticize AA because, on the evidence, over the long term, it's simply ineffective.
People aren't going to quit pointing that out. I'm certainly not, whether you have a problem with it or not.
You are, of course, free to keep reiterating your problem with criticism of AA to your heart's content--regardless of what I or anyone else thinks of that. :smile:
Looks like an endless loop to me. :cool:
Timoclea
-
The physical addiction of alcohol is rational, but the mental addiction, the "why" of why someone drinks is not so rationally based. I mean say one drinks because they think they are ugly aqnd drinking makes them less insecure. There is no rationally based thinking for that. The person may look quite lovely but they stil think that. there is no rational base for that. I used to feel such a way about myself. i never had anyone tell me I was ugly, but I was convinced I was. It was a completely irrational thing.
I understand your critisism of AA. I agree about the gene therapy. But I dont understand why if AA is workign for others why do you try so hard to convince others and me it dosnt work? Numbers and statistics and future cures aside, it is working for people right now. So what is the problem with that? I think that is where I get confused about your view. Why is it so wrong for someone to A) get help and B) for that help to work for them. If it works for them than good, dont oyu think? I mean I think we can agree on one thing. And that is that there are people suffering, we dont like that and we think there needs to be a solution, right? I mean neither one of us wants anyone to suffer from drug addiction. Neither one of us wants people to be unhappy and out of control in their lives. However I feel like there are many different methods to choose form to get that help and no matter what it is, if it works than cool! I feel like you are saying try different methods, but for gods sake dont try AA or treatment!
I mean if those things work for those people gettign help than cudoz to them.
I never once said AA is the only answer.
I did say it is an option and could work.
I hear you saying they never will and therefore you shouldnt try it.
Say someone tried your way and it dosnt work for them. Would you eliminate AA just because you think it might not work?
If they trie dit all and AA works, then what is the problem with that?
( By the way to make sure you can follow my typing, Im addressing the post that starts " Of course drug addiction and alcoholism are rationally based things...")
Well isnt someone who drinks and drives abusing their rights? Rights didnt mean much to them when the got into their car and drove drunk. But as soon as they are being punished for abusing their rights, now it is a big deal? I mean driving is dangerous and a privledge, not a right.
Well, not allowing someone to do drugs is a violation of their rights. So should drugs be legal? What is your view?
Ive been to a hell of alot of meetings and I can tell you that alot of the things that are said in there adress how people learned to deal with their addiction. It is useful stuff in my opinion. and it dosnt all have to do wiht AA. It has to do with how each person is coping wiht it in many different ways.
Have you ever been to a meeting? What was your experience there? Did you see alot of babbling about AA? I have said many times that the steps of AA could be used in any area of your life not just in alcoholism and stuff. Making amends when you do something hurtful to someone else is always a good thing. Writing a list of your "personal defects of character" and finding the origin of those and working on them seems good to me too. Giving up control over the things you cant change is a good idea as well.
I think my point is if an alcohlic was so worried about their rights, than they wouldnt put them in jeapordy by drinking and driving or selling drugs or whatever.
And you were saying in another post that jail time seems good for that offense.
Isnt that a total violation of rights?
YOu sai dit perfectly when you said "Your emotions are real things to you, but arent rel once oyu get outside your own head."
I think that goes for your opinions too, as with mine. They are real to us, but they mean diddly squat in someone elses reality. I mean just because you believe AA dosnt work, dosnt make a recovering person in AAs experience any less valid or their recovery any less valid.
I dont think your cold. Actually your quite like my Dad> Hes a mathamatician and goes alot of of what is rational and less off emotion. I think its brilliant that you fight for a cause you so strongly believe in. Even though I think your wrong in this case, I respect you for standing up for your beliefs.
I am not too attached to AA personally. It worked for a time and now I have tried something else. That is why I say it isnt the only answer. However I use the principles of AA alot still. It is definetly not my moral and religious position!
YOu may see me as foolish but I think its more foolish to fight with someone over something so trivial when we have the same overall goal in mind. I believe in a persons right to be happy. I believe in a persons freeedom of choice, and I think that has alot to do with what Im saying here. I think you are misunderstanding me. I think AA works for some and those it dosnt can find something else that does. Agree?
-
I think your red band idea is great. ( I am not being sarcastic or anything I really do)
But I dont see the problem with using both tecniques of that and AA. Hey someone might mandatorily go and get alot of help from it. Is their recovery invalid because it dosnt work fro others who go involuntarily? I think that thier recovery matters and if it takes an AA meeting or two than they should do it.
But he red ban is a violation of rights no matter how you word it. So its contradictory to say "they have rights! They sholdnt be forced into anything!" and then say "We shold implement a red ban where they get their drinking rights, driving rights taken away and then lock them up until there is a cure with out trying to help them at all while they are loked up."
I think no matter what you do trying to control someone actions is always going to take a way soem rights. The question I believe is, is it worth it to them to take away soem rights so they can get help?
-
The reason I said that about criticizing AA si becasue you sadi several times in anothe rpost that you dont like people substituting emotion for stuff, you dont like the evangilism of AA and so on. I was merely statign that while you feel that way I too dont like it when people critisize AA. Im not losing sleep at night about people not agreeing with me.
I have no prolem wiht people criticising AA. I have aproblem wiht peopel who refust to accept that it could help people and is helping people right now. Hey if you dont like it thats cool. I respect that. But I dont see the point in critisising AA, which in return critisises the people using it to get help.
All I know is that it works for those I love. My grandmother lived an extra 8 years or so because of her getting help in AA. She died of cancer, but she would have died from drinking if she wouldnt have gone to AA. And I am so happy she did.
I apologize if my typing is hard to follow. This is my first and only forum Ive been on and I dont use the computer much (only for solitaire!) so yeah. But I would like you to tell me what part of it is hard to follow? Is it my ghrammer or my paragraphs or something? I want you to be able to follow what Im saying, so help me out there.
-
If when you finish a paragraph, you hit [Enter] twice instead of just once, it leaves a blank line in between that and the next paragraph. Those blank lines help a lot.
I guess my thing with saying AA doesn't work even though people may feel like it does is that sometimes something happens and we think we know the reason for it, but the thing we decide is the reason isn't really.
One of the things we went over in college was they'd put a cat or a rat or a pigeon in a box, and they'd put a lever in the box, or a button, that would open the door and let the critter out of the box.
Well, eventually the critter would accidentally hit the lever or the button and get out of the box.
It turns out that if you keep putting the critter back in the box, it doesn't learn to go right over and push the button or move the lever. What it does is goes through a little ritual where it does over and over again the sequence of events that happened right before and up to when the box opened (including hitting the button or moving the lever).
The pigeon thinks*** that turning around in circles pecking in a little dance is part of the process that opens the door and is essential to getting the door open.
The cat thinks it's got to rub up against the pole in the middle of the box, then roll over on its back, then....etc. until it hits the button.
And so forth--the animals develop these rituals that they clearly think are helping them open the box and are part of opening the box, but they're not.
You could put an animal in a box that didn't have the button or the lever and it would keep doing the whole ritual until it gave up.
The difference with humans is that we're a little more savvy about noticing there are such things as buttons or levers, but we're still prone to superstitious behaviors the same way cats, rats, or pigeons are.
Sometimes the superstitious behavior is purely personal, like a lucky sweater. Or attending a certain kind of meeting.
What I think happens is that people who are already motivated to quit drinking go to AA, and the people that keep going are the ones that are *still* motivated to quit drinking. I think the ones that are in remission would be in remission anyway without AA---or would be doing just as well with a garden variety support group or a couple of good friends that would encourage them. Which is kinda what the people who stop drinking *without* going to AA do.
I have a friend who recognized he was an alcoholic and stopped drinking because he saw a movie on TV. The movie had some guy whose life was a mess sitting in a pshrink's office and the guy asked something like, "What am I going to do?" and the pshrink said, "First, stop drinking."
For some reason those words stuck for my friend, and he stopped drinking. Spontaneous remission.
He stayed in remission for the rest of his life. He ended up dying last year in a car wreck that was the other guy's fault (yes, my friend was sober).
My friend *did* get, after several years, to the point that he could have one drink and then stop. He would, very rarely, if it was a social occasion where drink was appropriate, have that one drink. And then he'd stop. He never went back to getting drunk.
Just because you're in remission and you're in AA doesn't mean AA did it or even helped do it.
I don't care if you go.
I don't care if practically everyone with a drinking problem goes.
Let me share a personal story:
When I'm off my meds, and I feel bad---particularly before I was diagnosed and knew there was anything wrong---I would come up with all sorts of reasons why I was upset and hurting and feeling bad. I would come up with all kinds of things that upset me, or made me feel worthless, or made me feel guilty, or made me mad, or made me sad, or made me not want to get out of bed and face the day, or made me giddy, etc.
But the reactions I had were *disproportional*---and that's the key---to the "reasons" I found for why I did what I did.
The "reasons" were wrong.
I felt those ways, disproportionately, because I had a mental illness and my brain chemistry and physiology was screwed.
I found this out when they got me on the right medicines and my reactions started being proportional to the events.
*Most* people, when they see themselves in the mirror and don't like the way they look that day, or they have a squabble with a friend, or a friend blows them off (for something totally unrelated to them, it turns out later), or even when a loved one dies----*Most* people do not get so unable to cope with that and feel so overwhelmed by feelings about those things that they go crawl inside a bottle for months.
*Most* people don't go out and get trashed, a lot, when they feel good and have something to celebrate
The reaction (getting drunk a lot) is disproportionate to the stimulus, and sometimes misinterprets events in a negative, personal way when they're nothing to do with the person. Or goes to excess getting over-giddy about a party or celebration or whatever.
What I'm saying is the events are not why people drink, just like the events I was experiencing were not why I was having depressed feelings or manic feelings.
The screwed up brain biology is why people *overreact* to events by getting drunk, over and over again. Until they're trapped in a vicious cycle of getting drunk because they feel worthless because they're a drunk.
Alcoholics don't all have such tragic lives when they start drinking too much. They're not "driven" to drink by events---plenty of people live through similar events and *don't* start drinking too much. Pretty much whatever tragedy or success you can come up with, plenty of non-alcoholics have been there, too.
The drinking is an excessive reaction to events.
The events aren't why the alcoholic reacts excessively. The events aren't causing the drinking.
Once the brain problem is triggered, it's the brain problem causing the overreaction that causes the craving (compulsion). And failing to control the compulsion *that time* causes the drinking.
"One day at a time" is, at least, an AA saying that is a pretty fair statement of how to cope with a compulsion.
Anyway, that's what I think.
I think the people who get better at AA get better because they decided to stop drinking and started finding ways to not overreact to events in their lives, not because of AA.
Timoclea
-
On 2005-04-04 18:26:00, Anonymous wrote:
What I think happens is that people who are already motivated to quit drinking go to AA, and the people that keep going are the ones that are *still* motivated to quit drinking. I think the ones that are in remission would be in remission anyway without AA---or would be doing just as well with a garden variety support group or a couple of good friends that would encourage them. Which is kinda what the people who stop drinking *without* going to AA do.
Yup, talismans are powerful, even if you know they're just tokens. When my dad decided to quit drinking, he started buying lotto tickets. It may seem silly, but he was just about the most obsessive penny pincher, financial planner, etc. there ever was. One reason he wanted to quit was because of the cash it was costing him and how much it made him feel like those damned fools playing the lotto.
So he figured out what he had been spending and spent exactly that much on the tickets. He kept every one of them, too, as a reminder and because the fine print indicates that you can use them to claim a tax credit in the event you ever actually win any large amount.
When he didn't need it any more, he quit playing the lotto and bought himself a nice chunk of land out in the country. And, I'm told, he'd have himself a beer or three w/ the neighbors from time to time, but never made an expensive habit of it again.
I have found that the best way to give advice to your children is to find out what they want and then advise them to do it
--Harry S. Truman
-
T,
I am not annoyed, surprised, angered or anything of that sort with you and your opinions. I'm just pointing out that you are quite the contradictor. But enoughs enough. I'm done proving myself. I will leave you the lasting thought of you had the choice to respond or not. You did. I didn't force you to respond. If you had said you were done why did you respond? Interesting.
Absolutism isn't always bad. However, I find it interesting that you didn't even take a look at what I pointed out to you.
Good luck. Keep fighting the good fight. Believe in what you believe.
It's not about who's right and who's wrong. It's about tact and truth. I am not trying to rile you up. Just trying to expand things.
-
I agree with you that there are people who get better without AA. For sure. I mean I have known some who stopped doing crystal without any treatment or NA or anything. The thing I see that is concerning is she isnt any better. She isnt doing drugs, but she is the same way she was when she was doing drugs (except for the stealing and the crazy mood swings.) I deffinetly think that there are reasons people drink. Not all of them make sense. You were unhappy for a reason you couldnt control. You have bi-polar. But alot of alcoholics dont have a brain disorder that causes them to drink. When you start drinking heavily, you can certainly get your brain used to alcohol. Used to the need for that drug when you feel bad or when you have aphysical craving or whatever. Some people who genetically have it in their4 family (like me) have an ability for alcohol to be more of a problem just because of genetics and it may not have alot to do with why they drink. But I know alot of people who just felt unhappy and insecure and drank to get over that fear. I'll tell you about my mother in law. Big time drug addict and alcohlic. She is still an alcoholic but dosnt do drugs anymore. She has had a miserable life. Her parents were alcoholics and beat her and her 7 siblings. Her son died was murdered when he was 3 weeks old and the babysitter who did it eventually got out of jail and sued her lawyer for misrepresentaionand got a 1,000,000.00 settlement while my husband and his mom got 8,000.00. She has been in abusive relationship after another and my husband has been abused by them as well. I think she chooses alot of her drama, but that is what she knows. She dosnt know sober people. She has told me on several occasions that she just neeeds a drink so she can socialize and "be herself". She showed up drunk to the hospital the day her granddaughter was born. I think AA could help her alot. She has tried thereapy alot, getting rid of her friends, moving, trying to just stop, going somewhere to withdrawl and coming back sober, support from friends, ect. But she has never tried AA. i think it might help her. Plus she could see that there are people like her who have similar backgrounds in life and their drinking who found a way to quit.
I think the way one feels about themselves has a lot to do with why they trash their bodies with too much booze and drugs. Not too many alcoholics feel really good about themselves while in their drinking. And many I know who just stopped without any help are not happy. Are not doing well. They may not be drinking but they are still dramatic, depressed, people. But the people I know who quit and got help in AA actually work on their life and thier problems, find a solution and are always seeking to better themselves and are therefore happy and content.
And it is hard for either one of us to say events are or are not the reason why someone drinks. Everyone drinks excessivly for their own reasons. i know for me that is why i drank. It is impossible for you to know if that is why someone drinks or not.
Its true alot of people dont drink and have similar situations as my mother in law. But they may have chosen another way to deal with it unhealthily. My husband dosnt drink and hes had a horrible life. But he will smoke pot to deal with his feelings when he dosnt want to think about stuff. That isnt ok either. Or take my step mom who has had a hard life. She dosnt do any substances but she is the meannest, rudest person alot of the time. She has her nice moments, but she is for the most part unbearable to deal with.
And events trigger emotions. I am not saying the event causes the drinking, it is the emotion sprung form the event that causes a person to drink and numb that out. I see that happen alot. People get drunk to forget their problems and that is simply unhealthy. And if they do that and can stop and deal wiht it, then they are not an alcohlic. But if they do that and cant stop then they are.
"I think the people who get better at AA get better because they decided to stop drinking and started finding ways to not overeact to events in their lives, not because of AA."
Where do you think they learned to do that? Not on their own! It is because they wen tot AA and work steps and talk to other recovering peopel that they learned the tricks of the trade so to speak. They have been doing the same thing for so long that they got used to it. Aa helped them see that that isnt the only way. How do you explain the transformation? YOu think they went to meetings and did steps and all that and realized outside of that that they needed to stop overreacting to their events? I think it is silly to say a person who goes to AA got better but not because they were going to AA, but just because they were not drinking. It takes alot of work to change a habit and along time. If they knew how to do that already than why did they join AA?
The truth of the matter is everone is different. Their reasons for drinking are different, their backrounds are different, thier drinking is even different. Your life dosnt have to be complete shit from drinking to be an alcohlic. Ive known people who had a good job and kept it, had a family and kept it, had money and kept it. But they had a mental and physical addictin to alcohol and needed help with that. Soem choose AA, some not. I think it is a rad program and anyone could utalize steps in thier life. There are some that are simply good rules of thumb to live by and I appreciate that about AA. I amy not go all the time anymore, but I havnt stopped using the principles in my everyday life. I may still "mess up" in my life, make mistakes, and be depressed. But now I know that I can change my behavior and I know different ways to deal with the situations in my life and with the emotions that overwhelm me sometimes.
-
Actually a habit does not take that long to break. I know they call that a craving in AA. They are correct in that after just over a month it is no longer a habit. So to say people need AA for extended periods due to a habitual need for alcohol is untrue. (After that point it is probably purely in their head).
Now as for why does AA work for some...it is a question nobody can answer. You may have amusing little stories about this person or thats experience...But that doesn't make it fact.
My opinion AA is probably successful for some b/c they want it to be. Maybe it just is a good fit to their personality. Maybe the moon was in Venus the first meeting they ever attended...point is nobody knows so get off T's back b/c nobody has the magical answer only opinions.
-
A habit takes a while to break. I didnt say it took a lifetime. Here let me speak from my personal experience. Just because I am sober and dotn have the habit of drinking anymore, dosnt mean I am fixed and have no problems in my life. I still have the same issues I had when I was drinking that come up from time to time. But AA helped me learn how to deal with the emotions, the feelings, the situations as they come up in my life. So the habit of drinkin dosnt take forever to fix but the emotions and feelings associated with my drinking habit are still a problem that I need the principles and the tings i learned in AA to help me deal with it. i hope that makes sense.
I actually said the exact same thing you said in so many words. I speak from my experience and the experience of those I know. I am not speaking for everyone. I said it is impossible for anyone to know if AA works for them or not. it is impossible to know why it works because every alcoholic is different. So you reiterated what I said. The only fact I stated as fact was my personal experience and the expereinces of those around me. You must not have been reading the whole conversation.
I am not on Ts "back". If you think that then you dont understand what a debate is. I am not doing anything but having a healthy debate with her. I havnt beliitled her, said she was an idiot, or attacked her as a person, so kindly mind your own buiseness. If she has a problem with anything Im saying, then I woudl appereciat it if she woudl address me. I havnt heard any complaints so far and I have been very open to what she has to say and agree with her on many points, so you dont know what your talking about and maybe you should read the whole thing before you make judgements about anything. T, do you feel I am being rude to you? I am on your back? Do you feel I havnt been open to you and havnt been open to what you have to say? I am a reasonable person and look at things from all sides. That is what a debate is.
-
On 2005-04-04 19:00:00, Antigen wrote:
Yup, talismans are powerful, even if you know they're just tokens.
Oz never did give nothin' to the Tin Man, that he didn't, didn't already have.
-
Graduate,
Off of T's back? Wasn't aware she was on it. Different things work for different people. No one goes through life having the antidote to every ailment. It's about finding what works for that person and if it doesn't work then move onto the next thing. To say that AA is bad is false. AA may be bad for some but for others work. You all have failed to come up with a treatment you feel is helpful. Our point is that To deem something as unnecessary or bad is wrong. Who are you to say that it won't work for anyone? It is not something that is forced. Therefore if those who don't feel it works for them may choose to find a different method to help them.
-
Perri, you and Buzzkill seem to be the only regular posters around here that actually think and make sense.
-
I guess my experience in this is that my family's get togethers were full of drama and not too happy until just about everybody in the family ended up, for one reason or another, put on psychiatric medication.
Just about everyone is *much better now*.
A lot of times people's "drama" and various other unhealthy ways of dealing with things are symptoms that something's wrong with their brains.
I won't go so far as to say "always".
The thing is, when people have trauma in their lives, it makes permanent biological changes in their brains---it does damage. Adrenaline and some of the chemicals that get dumped into your system while something traumatic is happening to you burn the memories into your brain.
That's why soldiers have such vivid, troubling memories of the horrible things they've seen---memories that never seem to fade with time, never really go away, and come back over and over in very vivid nightmares.
I have a Vietnamese friend whose dad worked for the CIA in the war. She was on the last boat out of Saigon. She saw a lot of horrible things that small children should never see. Those memories are burned into her brain, vividly. They haunt her all the time.
She's a basically happy woman, she's gone on with her life, but those memories of dead bodies and the very horrible ways they died and the very horrible things done to those bodies are burned into her brain, permanently.
Genetics are where we start from. They're where our brains start from. But things that happen to us make changes to our brains. Some of those changes are good ones, like learning. Some of those changes are not good.
We're finding out now that *some* of the psychiatric drugs have the effects they do because they actually fix *some* kinds of damage. Like when the damage is to some of the cells that aren't nerve cells themselves but help the nerve cells out---some of those cells start recovering and healing and getting back to normal levels on the right meds.
Therapy and positive thinking no doubt also make changes in your brain. So do supplements like Ginko biloba or Omega 3 fish oils. And depending on the problem, they can be good medicine. (Like ginko biloba actually helps some with alzheimers--not anywhere near a cure, but it helps). I'm not saying therapy does nothing.
I'm saying it's very important to keep pursuing direct medical interventions looking for effective ones, because, used right, those and therapy support each other and work together.
My problem with AA is that I don't want it preached as "the answer" to the extent that it drowns out awareness of the need for development of medical interventions.
And since you're not doing that, I'm not trying to say anyone *here* is preaching AA as the One True Answer.
But it does get done, and that's a lot of any problem I have with AA.
I still think it's a placebo, but I'm all for placebos---particularly when there's not much better available.
Timoclea
-
I'll be glad to mind my own business when you stop posting on a public forum.
You also said something about I don't know what a debate is...do me a favor stick to your opinions...you don't know me or what I do or do not know.
Of course AA doesn't work for everyone. Nothing is a blanket answer for all.
One more thing I wasn't actually disagreeing with you guys on all points so maybe it would help you to reread my post (as you suggested I do)also.
The worst part is you guys really can not fathom how anyone else perceives your posts. It immediately becomes mind your business, you don't know what a debate is, T can defend herself etc. If this is a debate you are right I do it differently.
-
The only reason I told you to kindly mind your own business is because you were implying I was doing something wrong by debating wiht her. On the contrary i find her views insightful and well thought out. If you wanted to write me directly about your disagreements with something I said then by all means i woud love to discuss. However, I do not find it your buisiness to say i am bothering someone and am "on their back" simply because I didnt agree wiht them about everything they said. That is inconidearte and entirely not true.
The reason i said that about you not understandig debate is if uyou would read all we have said back and forth you would see that nothing was said that is out of the ordinary for a debate. I actually agree with her about many things so i cannot see how oyu thought I was "on her back".
Your post was very short and easy to read and I thought the first part of it was great, particularly because it is what I just said so i agree wiht you. It seemed you were jumping to conclusions about a debate going on with someone else and were accusing me falsly which I do not appreciate. I was merely trying to show you that the conversation going on between us was interestig and both sides of it were well thought out and had excellent points and therefore I was not at all on her back. She didnt complain to me so i didnt se it as your place to defend her over it. If she didnt like it she shouldnt post on a public forum eirhter, however she said nothing of it to me.
I think she's a big girl and can defend herself. She seems smart enough anyway.
-
T,
I think alot of times people who go to Aa and get help wiht their lives say it is so great because they are thankful to be happy again. I agree with you though, that some people do make it seem as if it is the cure of all ages. I was discussing the solution to the drunk driving stuff we were talkign about wiht a friend and I thought, "you know, it's true AA might not help alot of people in a situation like that. Maybe theyre not ready. Maybe they need something else. But I'll be damnned if I wouldnt rather get sent to AA for a while than jail!"
I think alot of people get misdiagnosed and dont get on the right drug they need for a while. I knwo my best friend has serious problems with panic attacks and forever was on the wrong medication. Now that she is on the right stuff she feels alot better. But she said to me that even though she needs her medication to help with the panic attacks, she also needs therapy and AA. She said the combination is the right thing for her. The drug wasnt the only thing that helped, but it helped alot.
I do think though that peoples attitudes get blamed on brain disorders and they get on drugs they dont need, especially children. I think we need to find better ways to diagnose people wiht the right things and make sure they are on the righ tstuff for them. I get depressed alot for example, but I am not clinically depressed. Alot of people go through depression, mood swings, anger, ect. Prescription drugs arent always the answer, but I;m glad they are there to help the people who really need them. I am a total advocate for them as long as they are diagnosed correctly. I think it would be foolish for someone to say they dont help because i know from my friends expereinces who have needed htem that they work wonders.
-
Graduate,
By all means stick your head in the conversation. Yes this is public. Oh and the anonymous poster and I are two different people so stop grouping us together. She sees things I don't because I don't have the same experience.
What is your suggestion for an alternative to AA? I'm curious to know.
-
On 2005-04-07 03:22:00, Perrigaud wrote:
What is your suggestion for an alternative to AA? I'm curious to know. "
Uh, how 'bout.....NOTHING. If people want to quit, they'll quit...whether or not they're in AA. The ONLY thing that I can see that AA could be helpful in is hanging out with others who aren't drinking. The "success" rate of AA is roughly 5%........know what the "success" rate for spontaneous remission is? .......... 5% If someone wants to quit, they'll quit.
-
In response to your post Perrigaud,
I responded to both your post and the anonymous one together more for the sake of saving time than grouping you together. Unfortunately with the limited time I have to respond I think it is easy to misrepresent what I am trying to say.
As for my thoughts on alternatives to AA. I am a believer in personal responsibility. Which by the way is why I think AA works for some people. They choose to make changes in their lives. Some people use religion. Ironically people have been known to go cold turkey and never look back when they join cults. The point is all of these people have made personal decisions to make a change. I think as a whole we are very quick to see every person as in need of "help". Then there are those who just wake up and decide to change b/c they want to. I know AA speaks on the dry drunk syndrome. But honestly I think that is one thing that keeps people coming back.
I think people can make a decision and stick to it without the steps. I also know people can make the internal changes they deem necessary in their lives without admitting in public they have a problem. But I also know others who need the support of a peer group.
Oh one more thing I would like to say I know some drugs require detox and other professional methods to quit. I am not suggesting someone using heroine could wake up and decide to change their life and it is all dandy. But what I want to say is only they can decide what happens after detox...not the steps...not their church...to me those are the those are merely the devices that work for them in backing up their own want for change.
Oh anon...by my initial post I in no way implied T was incapable of defending herself. I merely posted an opinion. :roll:
-
On 2005-04-07 06:46:00, Anonymous wrote:
The ONLY thing that I can see that AA could be helpful in is hanging out with others who aren't drinking. The "success" rate of AA is roughly 5%........know what the "success" rate for spontaneous remission is? .......... 5% If someone wants to quit, they'll quit."
This is where I think AA can be very dangerous to some people. If you think it's a good place to meet people who don't drink, think again. "The only requirement is a desire to quit drinking" and 95% of those folks habitually fail at that. In my very limited, mostly 2nd hand experience w/ AA groups, if anything, they're a great place to find a connection or drinkin' buddies or some vulnerable, credulous next victim if you happen to fancy dominance and psyche abuse over a chemical high. Anyone who believes that an AA meeting is a safe place to go when they're feeling beat down and vulnerable is a sitting duck.
The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics
is often very tolerant and human. But when fanatics are on top,
there is no limit to oppression.
--H.L. Mencken
-
On 2005-04-07 07:37:00, Antigen wrote:
"
On 2005-04-07 06:46:00, Anonymous wrote:
The ONLY thing that I can see that AA could be helpful in is hanging out with others who aren't drinking. The "success" rate of AA is roughly 5%........know what the "success" rate for spontaneous remission is? .......... 5% If someone wants to quit, they'll quit."
This is where I think AA can be very dangerous to some people. If you think it's a good place to meet people who don't drink, think again. "The only requirement is a desire to quit drinking" and 95% of those folks habitually fail at that. In my very limited, mostly 2nd hand experience w/ AA groups, if anything, they're a great place to find a connection or drinkin' buddies or some vulnerable, credulous next victim if you happen to fancy dominance and psyche abuse over a chemical high. Anyone who believes that an AA meeting is a safe place to go when they're feeling beat down and vulnerable is a sitting duck.
Agreed. Guess my point was that if there IS any upside to AA, its that it IS possible to find other like-minded people there. You really have to sift through the Nazis, Militants, Naysayers etc. but I did meet SOME decent people there. Of course they were all the ones who never went regularly, didn't "work the steps" or anything even close, just kinda stopped in for a cup of coffee and conversation.
-
The desire to not want to drink is different then the actual process of staying sober. To go to AA you dont have to say that you are going to stay sober and work steps and all that, you just have to want to stop. That is a good place to start for anyone considering stopping. to get too far ahead of yourself in recovery is very dangerous, hence "one day at a time". That way you dont have to overwhelm yourself with how hard it is.
I think you put it well when you said "my limited second hand experience with AA". If you have no real connection to AA how do you know that is waht its like? The person who told you that had a different experience than others in AA. We dont all view it that way. It seems the most important thing here is the person who is trying to stay sobers opinion about the help they are getting, not ours. If they see it the way you said the peopel you know do than Aa is not the place for them. Many alcoholics dont see Aa as a place to socialize wiht other drunks. They see it as a place to talk about what is happening in their lives and how they deal wit it in a sober way. They discuss solutions to thier problems and discuss how they would deal with it when they were drinking and how they now deal without alcohol as a crutch. Complain about it all you want, I am glad people are trying a solution instead of going to jail, or losing their family, or what ever. MAny people in recovery find it impossible for them to just stop and not get any help to stay quit. Sure you can stop, but what do you do when a craving is triggered? How do you work on yourself during recovery so you dont let the things that used to make you drink or do drugs get in your way and slowly assist you in relapse? No one told the peopel in recovery they had to do it a certain way. they choose AA for the most part and if it works they go to meetings and do steps and stuff. If it dosnt work as Ive said a million times, then there is nothing to stop them from trying something different. I am thankful for AA, not just cuz it helps me out, but because it helps out alot of peopel I know who need it.
-
To Anon,
Geez man, what meetings did you go to!? I've met many cool people in AA, especially at womens meetings. My best friends are form AA and I find them the most casual, hilarious, intellectual people I know.
-
On 2005-04-07 11:03:00, Anonymous wrote:
"The desire to not want to drink is different then the actual process of staying sober. To go to AA you dont have to say that you are going to stay sober and work steps and all that, you just have to want to stop.
Not according to most people who attend AA and certainly not if you get a sponsor!!!
That is a good place to start for anyone considering stopping. to get too far ahead of yourself in recovery is very dangerous, hence "one day at a time". That way you dont have to overwhelm yourself with how hard it is.
No, that's more thought stopping bullshit.
Many alcoholics dont see Aa as a place to socialize wiht other drunks. They see it as a place to talk about what is happening in their lives and how they deal wit it in a sober way.
Then they can just change the people they're hanging out with. AA has a very strict "code" that you're supposed to live by. If you stray from that "code" the Big Book says you'll DIE!!!
They discuss solutions to thier problems and discuss how they would deal with it when they were drinking and how they now deal without alcohol as a crutch.
Well, after dealing with AA crap for over 20 years I realized that I didn't really need that (and IMO, no one else does either). The solution to changing how you deal with problems that you used to deal with by drinking is.......DON'T DRINK. Its really that simple. I know I'm going to get all the AAers clamoring for my head, but that's the truth.
MAny people in recovery find it impossible for them to just stop and not get any help to stay quit.
IMO, that's because they're constantly told that they're "powerless". Even if they're NOT in AA, its just become so generally accepted that someone with a drinking problem is "powerless". I'm not buying it a bit and I think its incredibly dangerous to drill that into someone's head.
Sure you can stop, but what do you do when a craving is triggered?
You don't drink. I don't care what you DO do, just don't drink.
How do you work on yourself during recovery so you dont let the things that used to make you drink or do drugs get in your way and slowly assist you in relapse?
Good friends or legitimate therapy.
No one told the peopel in recovery they had to do it a certain way.
Bullshit. People are told that all the time.
they choose AA for the most part and if it works they go to meetings and do steps and stuff.
Or they're court ordered to that freak show of a religion.
If it dosnt work as Ive said a million times, then there is nothing to stop them from trying something different.
Well, there's all those people telling them they're going to DIE if they try something different. Bill Wilson and the Big Book say so. :roll:
I am thankful for AA, not just cuz it helps me out, but because it helps out alot of peopel I know who need it."
You can get the exact same "help" from a talisman of your choosing and a few good friends.Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.
--Edward Everett
-
On 2005-04-07 11:05:00, Anonymous wrote:
"To Anon,
Geez man, what meetings did you go to!? I've met many cool people in AA, especially at womens meetings. My best friends are form AA and I find them the most casual, hilarious, intellectual people I know."
Intellectual and AA are terms that should never be used together in a sentence. There is absolutely NOTHING intellectual about AA. In fact, it very actively discourages critical thought of any kind.
btw.....I'm the anon who said there ARE decent people there (sorry, forgot to sign in). I still stand by that, I've met them. But they're VERY VERY hard to find and if you DO find them, they're always the ones who just show up every once in a while to say hi to people and shoot the shit after the meeting.The introduction of a Creator has done our independence no good.
--Gore Vidal, author
-
On the contrary, my own sponsor told me to take it one day at a time and the dsire to want to quit is the best way to start. Now once on the path that is not eh only thing that keeps a person sober, certainly. And I think thats true of many AA people i know.
Thoughts progress into action. If you desire to quit then you will. You will also take the necessary steps to stay quit. Taking things slowly is better than rushing it and failing, which is what I do alot of times. I get too overwhlmed with the whole thing that I end up giving up. As long as I can see a clear path and can take it slowly I do well. I think alot of my recovering friends, not just in AA, can testify to that!
Thats not true. What code? Ive met so many different peopel in AA. Not one alike. Soem are old bikers, some are housewives, some are kids, some are students, some are really bad alcoholics, some are getting to the place where they are going to be really bad, ect. Ive never heard one person say "If you arent like everyone else in AA, you'll die!" I do hear people say if you keep drinking the way you are, you will die but we all know that.
Thats just not true. People drink to numb out feelings, to forget their problems all the time. Not every alocohlic can just not drink and everything is ok and all their problems are gone. to the ones that can good for them , but alot of us cant. I'm sorry you seem to have had bad experiences with AA, but where I live the meetings are caring, open, and understanding. Some suck, but I dont go to those. Every state, every city even has differetn meetings. Maybe you couldnt find one you really liked. It took me along time to find ones I felt comfortable in. I think you are right that some people can just quit and its all hunky dory, but for alot of peopel there were reasons we drank and we go to AA to find out why. Not to mention all the internalization and work Ive done outside of AA.
What does "IMO" mean? Im not up on the computer lingo. That is because they are powerless over alcohol, not the ability to change, but over alcohol. It says in the big book if you can stop drinking, our hats are off to you for doing something we couldnt do. I think alot of people who try to quit that arent in AA find it hard to quit that easily too. I know its hard for you to comprehend the whole having a reason to drink, but in order to help myself, I needed to first address the reasons why I drank exceesivly and then I could work on that and make sure it wasnt ever a reason again.
Just dont drink is something alot of sponsers and friends do say to the fiending person in question. but they also ask, "Do yo know why this is being triggered?" "What happened today?" ect. That dont just say "Yeah, so dont drink and it will all be ok. Bye now!"
I agree, therapy works as does good friends. But even the best of friends wiht the best of intentions sometimes make things worse when they dont know what its like to have a craving and overcome it. They give stupuid advice, or unintentionaly patronize you cuz they dont understand. If you have friends who have done it and overcame it wihtout AA and can give good advice than good. But alot of people who havnt been in your shoes as an addict cant understand.
They suggest they do it a certain way, but no one held a gun up to their head and forced them to do it their way. No one ever did that to me anyway! In a lockdown facility maybe yes. But in a voluntary thing like AA? No way. I dont know who youve been talking to but they were not sober. Any sober and real person in AA would let you make your own choice and the things they say are merely suggestions.
A religion? Thats extreme angry pants. I think your anger is clouding your ability to have a calm discussion. Geez you must have met some butt holes in AA for oyu to hate it this much! Its funny but I live in Colorado in a very religious town and it is really annoying. But thankfully we have openminded people here too and those are the meetings I attend.
Ive never heard them say that. And besides, I dont agree with everything the big book says and Im still here. I choose to pick what fits me adn go wiht it. I choose not to embrace the things I find stupid. And like I said the big book says if you can stop drinking 0on your own or if you can drink in a controlled way then good for you! But they couldnt do that so this is what they tried.
I think that is far fetched to say the people I know and myself (whom you know nothing about) could have done something differently and would have been just fine. You dont know me from adam and cant with any validity say that what you said holds any truth. What worked worked and Im glad it did. I might have chosen a different path, but I didnt and its a moot point anyway, cuz it already happened.
-
That dosnt mean there arent intellectual people who go to AA. That dosnt mean smart individuals dont go to AA. It is just one persons experience and what they did that hopefully can help another person stay sober. It isnt 100%. It isnt scientificly based or anything. But thats not to say that many smart people can use it and that only idiots go to AA.
My very best friend ever is in AA. Shes been sober 4 years. She is the most amazing person. She goes to at leat 4-5 meetings a week, and therapy, and is on meds. Ive also met cool people who take it seriously. Maybe its just the state your in or the city or something. After all every meeting is different.
-
I knew I should never have let myself get dragged into this, but I just can't seem to help myself. Maybe I'm addicted to debunking AA. :roll:
I think that is far fetched to say the people I know and myself (whom you know nothing about) could have done something differently and would have been just fine. You dont know me from adam and cant with any validity say that what you said holds any truth. What worked worked and Im glad it did. I might have chosen a different path, but I didnt and its a moot point anyway, cuz it already happened. "
I'm just giving my opinions about AA. Not you or your life, you're right...I don't know you from Adam and you don't know me from Eve. Don't assume that I have a problem with AA just because I haven't met the "right" AA people yet.All religions have been made by men.
--Napoleon Bonaparte, French emperor
-
Nice one, Cayo.
I'd respond, too, but I'm trying to be an example of "What will happen if you don't join our cult" (they're so pathetic they need all the help they can get, so I'm doing my part)
-
I'm mostly spectating at this point in the thread, but I did want to say something about "thought stopping."
Thought stopping is a tool, like a spoon, or a fork, or a knife.
You can stab someone with a knife, or you can cut your dinner into bite-sized bits---or you can peel an apple sloppily and cut yourself.
It's all in how it's used. Not so much the intention, but whether the actual use is a Good Thing.
If you obsessively think bad or harmful things about yourself, or obsessively worry, or otherwise have self-destructive thoughts that roll around over and over in your head, thought stopping can be a very powerful therapeutic technique for helping you function better.
If thought stopping is used to keep you from applying your critical thinking abilities to a bill of goods someone is trying to sell you, or to otherwise shut down your bullshit detector, then the thought stopping is a Bad Thing.
I know, nobody said it was always bad.
It's just so many of you folks who've been in programs have had it done *to* you for the bad reasons and the bad purposes that I wouldn't blame you at all for "thought stopping" being a bit of a dirty word for you.
So I just wanted to drop my two cents in and remind people it's just a tool---the good, evil, or carelessness is in the application, not the tool itself.
Timoclea
-
I agree T. and having read your posts (and enjoyed them) I understand why you feel the need to clarify. I'm specifically talking about the thought stopping cliches that are so readily used by AA and thrown at anyone who dares question the great and powerful Oz.
I don't believe in God. My god is patriotism. Teach a man to be a good citizen and you have solved the problem of life.
--Andrew Carnegie, Scottish-born American industrialist and philanthropist
-
Aren't you all sooo witty. Hmm. ANd another thing to whoever was the ass that said "If they want to quit they can do so." Oh yes, it's that easy. Addiction is not another word for "Could quit whenever they wanted to but chooses not to." That was a load. [ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-04-08 01:35 ]
-
On 2005-04-08 01:32:00, Perrigaud wrote:
"Aren't you all sooo witty. Hmm. ANd another thing to whoever was the ass that said "If they want to quit they can do so." Oh yes, it's that easy. Addiction is not another word for "Could quit whenever they wanted to but chooses not to." That was a load. [ This Message was edited by: Perrigaud on 2005-04-08 01:35 ]"
Perri, I've always read and at least respected your opinions. I haven't always agreed with them, but I didn't just write you off as an "ass" because you had a different opinion than I.Moralizing, with the force of law or coercion, is a
far greater crime against the constitutional principles of our nation than unauthorized euphoria, regardless of the substance involved, be it chocolate or heroin.
--James
-
On 2005-04-07 17:07:00, Anonymous wrote:
A religion? Thats extreme angry pants. I think your anger is clouding your ability to have a calm discussion. Geez you must have met some butt holes in AA for oyu to hate it this much!
"A fair reading of the fundamental AA doctrinal writings discloses that their dominant theme is unequivocally religious," the court said. "Adherence to the AA fellowship entails engagement in religious activity and religious proselytization."--New York state's highest court http://www.positiveatheism.org/rw/alcohol.htm#NYCOURT (http://www.positiveatheism.org/rw/alcohol.htm#NYCOURT)
Warner also argued that by requiring participation in the Alcoholics Anonymous regimen, the government was establishing and promoting religious belief.
U.S. District Judge Gerard Goettel agreed, ...
http://www.positiveatheism.org/rw/warner.htm (http://www.positiveatheism.org/rw/warner.htm)
In a case currently before a federal court in Chicago two commercial airline pilots are suing their employer for being forced to participate in a program for alcohol abuse based on the AA Twelve Step Program 17 . They contend that the airline's policy discriminates against them on the basis of religion as one pilot is an atheist and the other a secular humanist. The pilots are suing on the grounds that AA's Twelve Steps refer to a monotheistic god and thus their forced participation is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ,
http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/aa.html (http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/aa.html)
Angry pants, all?Were the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now. Thus in France the emetic was once forbidden as a medicine, and the potato as an article of food. Government is just as infallible,[sic] too, when it fixes systems in physics. Galileo was sent to the Inquisition for affirming that the earth was a sphere.... It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.
Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia
-
I dont have alot of time to write for now Cayo, but Ill respond as quickly as I can.
I said you can quit if you want to, but it takes a much longer, more detailed process to STAY sober. Quitting is not going to solve everything. It will solve it for the moment, but many people relapse later on wihtout a plan so to speak. But I agree wiht you that people take things too literally in the big book. Ive found that the friends I have that stay sober dont do it "right" (if there is such a thing) all the time. Its progress, not perfection. I know that the bigbook says some stupid stuff, but it was also written by males in the 50s. They were not the most openminded people of all time, especially when it came to women in recovery. I think that times change and societys change and therefore I edit the things form the book I dont like and keep in mind that which I can embrace. I know alot of AA "nazis" woudl say do it this way or else!" but hose I know in my humble openminded meetings where I live would never say such a thing. They have prgressed with AA and dont take it all so literally, like the bible or something.
It says specifically what I said? Ive never read it. But then again Ive never read all the stories in it. Maybe someone there said it?
I think it is true, however that someone who understands addiction from firsthand expereince knows better than someone who reads it from a book. I would not go to a therapist to help me wiht my addictions if they werent in recovery. I have friends who feel the same way. One of my friends who had a hard relapse recently said her therapist is retarded in that way because shes never known what addiction is like. She told her "Why would anyone like to smoke pot? Or do drugs?" Well any addict knows why.
And for soem people, AA is the ONLY thing that worked for them. That was true of Bill W cuz back then there werent many alternatives. Thats not to say that it dosnt need a little revision. But a few passages sayign they feel it is the only thing that helped them and the peopel they know that tried it dosnt mean they might not feel differetnly now. Men have a way of thinking their way is the only way (women too, but Ive noticed every male in my life is pretty thick headed about that stuff) Bill W was no exception. I have always had a problem wiht the outdated ness of it. But I wont dicredit books just because they are outdated. If they have useful informationthat applies to me than cool! Who cares if most of it sucks? At least I found a nugget of truth that helped me. AA is in no way perfect. No recovery method is perfect or 100%. None. Nada. Zip. So I think it is important for any recovering person to look for what fits them best and if they need to follow the big Book "religiously" then thats what they need. I know when I relapsed the first time, it wasnt cuz I stopped going to meetings or calling my sponser. It had to do with my honesy level wiht myself and others, letting things slip that are important for me to be structured on, ect.
Again look at when the book was writen. Not many alternatives that worked.
I agree again. They can quit. But to stay sober is a totally differetn thing. AA isnt about quitting and sending you home all fixed. Its about staying sober.
Is it misguided to want to stay sober? I have a cousin who is an alcoholic but instead of AA, she goes to church. I am not a big fan of organized religion at all, but if it helps her, so be it.
Sometimes, I dont know if this is true for you, but it takes someone else to point out what Im doing wrong if i cant see it. And they dont say "heres what your doing wrong and heres how to fix it." By giving a personal expereince of their life and what helped them, you can see yourself in that snad try it too. No one could say why someon is in AA, but hey can try to help them figure it out.
I have taken every expereince in my life and used it as a recovery path. Treatment, AA, therapy, spiritual healing, ect. I dont look for one path, but I can see the good in AA instead of being cynical and only pointing out the bad. If we all went aroud looking for the bad in everything then we would all be miserable bastards. Well, most Americans are, but still. Like I am not a fan of any organized religion. In my opinion it does alot of damage. but I can see the good in it as well. I am not a fan of the government, especially the one we have now, but I can see the small microscopic good it does. I choose nott o wallow in the bad. It does no one any good. Sure I get passionate about it. Sure I hate the bad of it. But I dont want to live my life worrying about it if I'm not going to do anything to help. I think you are all great for getting activly involved (as far as a forum goes) to stop something oyu see as injustice. But I think a program designed to help people is nothing to freak out about. If they were trying ot force you to do it, then yes, that is lame. But if oyu can find a meeting of openminded individuals, then that is a great thing and AA can be effective.
I do think having a spiritual mind and body is an excellent thing, not just for sober people. I think it helps sober people, but being in touch with an inner self and exploring your own spirituality can be a good idea for anyone.
But how many of the 80% quit for good? How many just quit and stayed sober for a while and drank again? Staying sober is a lifetime commitment. You have to always want it, not just when things are really bad, I think. It helps to admit you have lost control of your drinking to stop. If oyu didnt feel you had no control over your drinking, you wouldnt have the desire to quit in the first place, agreed?
Pleas quote whare it says "were either true alcoholics or well die or come crawling back" Ill find it somewhere and quote what I said.
You make it seem as though it is easy when you say, "just quit"
My sponser of friends never broungt up the steps when I had a craving. Again, maybe its the place you live.
Actually at the treatment center i went to, AA was totaly voluntary. If you didnt want to go you didnt have to, cuz alot of people there didnt just have alcohol or drug problems. I ran a meetign on an upper level and only 2-3 peopel came a week. That seems pretty voluntary to me.
Alot of peopel were facing not just death, ultimatly drinking excessivlt will kill you. Either through liver problems, heart attack, diabetes, ect., but they are facing prison or jail time, losing their family, their marriage, their home, their car, what ever. That seems good enough to quit for me.
I dont know anyone who thinks of it as a religion. Regardless of what they thought it sounded liek or what it seems like, no one I know prays to Bill W.
Words words words. Actions speak louder than words. If the big book says something and I dont do it I dont automatically fall dead. TO them AA had to be tough or they would relapse. Its hard to relapse. It is unpleasant. They were just trying to make sure that didnt happen, and there way seemed to work so yeah. Many peopel dont take all of it as literally as you think.
I think I know why oyu dont like AA. Probably for the same reason I dont like organized religion. But can we agree that it is always good to look for the positive in something and acknowledge that instead of focusing only on the bad?
"Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it."
-Helen Keller
-
I read your post, T, and I agree. Thought stopping is fantabulous. However. Aa is simply a tool as well. Everyign Ive learned in my life are simply tools that are there iF I need them. When I said earlier that attitude is improtant and oyu always have the power to coose a beeter one, I meant it! You can stop your negative thinking and replace wiht positive. AA does that lot (at the meetings I went and go to) They give an example of how their negative thinking was creating problems fotr them and how they overcame it as a sober person. I guess Id say AA is a tool as well as thought stopping.
-
Ginger,
Hey! I thought angry pants was pretty good.
-
Cayo,
Heres the quote I wanted to write wiht my last post.
"Darkness makes us aware of the stars, and so when dark hours arise, they may hold a bright and lovly thing we might never have known other wise."
A perfect description af how I fell about the good AA has to offer.
-
Cayo,
I'm sorry Ass wasn't nice. However I think that that opinion is quite off. If it were easy to quit an addiction than wouldn't so many people be unaddicted? Honestly, that opinion was by far quite farfetched. Addiction...that's like me saying that if someone wants to learn a language it's as easy as simply speaking it. No, it takes time, effort, and practice. It's feasible yes but it's not something done overnight. What's even harder about addiction is that it's an imbalance.
-
On 2005-04-09 02:58:00, Perrigaud wrote:
"Cayo,
I'm sorry Ass wasn't nice. However I think that that opinion is quite off. If it were easy to quit an addiction than wouldn't so many people be unaddicted? Honestly, that opinion was by far quite farfetched. Addiction...that's like me saying that if someone wants to learn a language it's as easy as simply speaking it. No, it takes time, effort, and practice. It's feasible yes but it's not something done overnight. What's even harder about addiction is that it's an imbalance. "
Perri, if you'll look back I said more than once that it is NOT easy. But, if someone wants to quit they will. They'll do what they have to do to quit and stay quit. It is not easy by any means, but it can be done.
I don't buy into the whole "disease" bs either. It wasn't until AFTER I refused to believe that I was "powerless" and "diseased" (believed that shit for 20 years) that I could drink like a normal, sane person without having to get trashed.
I've got a lot more to say on this and I'd like to continue the discussion. Gotta run for now GREAT weather today, I've got to get out in it.Our Bible reveals to us the character of our god with minute and remorseless exactness... It is perhaps the most damnatory biography that exists in print anywhere. It makes Nero an angel of light and leading by contrast.
--Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist
-
Cayo,
Were you the one that said that addicts can just quit on a whim? It was an anonymous poster that had said that.
I have been reading your posts and I agree and disagree respectfully.
I am not an addict of alcohol or drugs and so I don't claim to know too much about it. I do however empathize.
Have fun on your run. I'm jealous. I'm about to get out of work. Can't run today :cry: unless I do it at 7 at night. Have to go to job #2.
-
No, I dont' think I ever said that an addict can just quit on a whim. If someone is truly addicted (and IMO, that's different from a 'disease') and wants to quit, its anything but easy. This explains a lot of what I mean about 'just don't drink'.
http://orange-papers.org/orange-addmonst.html (http://orange-papers.org/orange-addmonst.html)
Now its my turn to be jealous. Wish I had the disclipline to exercise. I'm not going out to run, I'm too lazy for that. :lol: I'm hitting the beach to park my lazy ass on it for a few hours. Hope everyone has a great day!!!!The strength of the Constitution lies entirely in the determination of each citizen to defend it. Only if every single citizen feels duty bound to do his share in this defense are constitutional rights secure.
-- Albert Einstein
-
You live by a beach. Nice. I will be doing some nighttime running under the stars. Hope no animal eats me.
Someone said it was easy to just quit like the snap of a finger. It is hard to quit. Most can't quit cold turkey.
-
I just wanted to apologize for the brainwashed ramblings that occured in this thread. I was very under WWASP control until recently and reading what I wrote made me sick. I was wrong and I feel like a fool. Thanks to all the people on here who helped me see the truth and who were patient with me even though I was rather insane.
Amanda
-
On 2005-09-13 19:35:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I just wanted to apologize for the brainwashed ramblings that occured in this thread. I was very under WWASP control until recently and reading what I wrote made me sick. I was wrong and I feel like a fool. Thanks to all the people on here who helped me see the truth and who were patient with me even though I was rather insane.
Amanda"
::bigsmilebounce:: ::birthday:: :nworthy:
-
Amanda, that's great you have come to see your program experience not as your were programmed to see it, but as it really is/was. Any ideas on how to stop the madness? Educate parents on why these programs do more harm than good?
-
Never mind, Amanda. You ought to have got a load of me while I was in the drink. LOL
Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man.
--Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President, author, scientist, architect, educator, and diplomat
-
I can only speak for myself when I say this but:
I forgive your "programmed" rantings.....been there....done that, myself. In fact if most of us stop and think about it ...we have all been there...I believe my favorite terminology used for this would be "emotional vomiting"....this is typical and very characteristic of someone that has been a victim of brainwashing or cult-like tactics(abuse).
I am proud of you for having the courage to admit it but I do not want or find it necessary for you to beat yourself up about it.
The best you can do now is be your own best friend and show yourself the love that you need!
I wish you all of the best for your life with this new revelation for your bright future ahead!
warmest regards,
-DP :cool: [Religion is] the daughter of hope and fear, explaining to ignorance the nature of the unknowable.
--Ambrose Bierce
-
I think we've all been there and done it. Some of us don't ever get out of it...or worse yet...we still live and breathe it. Reality isn't always fun when it hits you after being out for some time.
Amanda...don't feel bad. It's part of learning.
-
Yeah, Im on this great forum called End Institutionalized child abuse, but I think the best thing anyone can do is to be a good parent to your kids. Dont fuck them up and then expect them to handel puberty perfectly. Kids mess up and all teenagers are rebellious save a few. People need to change their mindset about how they percieve what a good kid is. Good kids usually reflect good parenting.
-
On 2005-09-15 23:34:00, Perrigaud wrote:
"I think we've all been there and done it. Some of us don't ever get out of it...or worse yet...we still live and breathe it. Reality isn't always fun when it hits you after being out for some time.
Amanda...don't feel bad. It's part of learning. "
So are you now agreeing buddy? I dotn feel bad really, I just want the people who read those horribly brainwashed posts before this one to know that even the most strong willed advocates for the program change their minds. Ive met so many people on other sites that are all "yay programs, shut up because programs "saved my life" and I feel nautious. I can see now how so many people must have felt on here trying to talk some sense into me! So I guess I just feel what its like in their shoes now and I no longer want to associate myself with that brainwashed person I was before. Thats all really.
-
Well, guilt is part of how they sucked you in and kept you in, and even now you feel it after realizing the truth.
You shouldn't! YOURE the victim here, not the adults there who played the glorified victim for so damned long - don't sweat it!
But yeah, welcome to reality. Where people dont keep moral inventories, have mind-fuck seminars, and *gasp* DO engage in debauchery, recreational chemicals, distilled spirits and the smoke of various burnt plants.
So yeah, dont worry. We're here for ya :silly: I cannot see how a man of any large degree of humorous perception can ever be religious -- unless he purposely shut the eyes of his mind and keep them shut by force.
--Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist
-
On 2005-09-24 16:31:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"Well, guilt is part of how they sucked you in and kept you in, and even now you feel it after realizing the truth.
You shouldn't! YOURE the victim here, not the adults there who played the glorified victim for so damned long - don't sweat it!
But yeah, welcome to reality. Where people dont keep moral inventories, have mind-fuck seminars, and *gasp* DO engage in debauchery, recreational chemicals, distilled spirits and the smoke of various burnt plants.
So yeah, dont worry. We're here for ya :silly: I cannot see how a man of any large degree of humorous perception can ever be religious -- unless he purposely shut the eyes of his mind and keep them shut by force.
--Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist
"
Thanks! Yeah if anything I feel anger not guilt about being tricked and fucked over. But I can say I am happy with who I am now and I know who I am. I never really had my own identity in the program or locked in that mentality...
-
Wow! ye said a mouthful there. That was the hardest part for me is trying to figure out, "where do I go from here, now that I have awakened from this horrible nightmare?"
Then I remember thinking..... "I will go to myself."
I hope ye all get what I mean.
warm regards,
-DPBeing sleepy can impair someone's ability to do thier job. People
can sleep at home and come to the job with sleepiness still in their system. The sleepiness can still be there long after the employee has slept. When someone is found to be sleepy on the job, they can claim that they went to sleep the night before. The only solution to this problem is to ban employees from sleeping.
--Arthur Slabosky
-
On 2005-09-24 16:31:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"Well, guilt is part of how they sucked you in and kept you in, and even now you feel it after realizing the truth.
You shouldn't! YOURE the victim here, not the adults there who played the glorified victim for so damned long - don't sweat it!
But yeah, welcome to reality. Where people dont keep moral inventories, have mind-fuck seminars, and *gasp* DO engage in debauchery, recreational chemicals, distilled spirits and the smoke of various burnt plants.
So yeah, dont worry. We're here for ya :silly: I cannot see how a man of any large degree of humorous perception can ever be religious -- unless he purposely shut the eyes of his mind and keep them shut by force.
--Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist
"
God, to think of all of the stupid assed things I said in social situations right after I got out of school. *shudder* I was SUCH an ass, and people hated me, or at least thought I was batshit nuts! I alienated SO many potential friends, and drove the ones who initially liked me away with all of my craziness and program-speak and lack of social skills. (And I had enough problems with social skills already, thank you.) I still bury my head in my hands in embarassment today when I think about it. Strangely, I blame myself, not the school, for being so stupid and gullible.
I'm right there with you on that sentiment, though. Welcome to the real world. Glad you could make it.
-
On 2005-09-24 19:37:00, Anonymous wrote:
On 2005-09-24 16:31:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"Well, guilt is part of how they sucked you in and kept you in, and even now you feel it after realizing the truth.
You shouldn't! YOURE the victim here, not the adults there who played the glorified victim for so damned long - don't sweat it!
But yeah, welcome to reality. Where people dont keep moral inventories, have mind-fuck seminars, and *gasp* DO engage in debauchery, recreational chemicals, distilled spirits and the smoke of various burnt plants.
So yeah, dont worry. We're here for ya ::rainbow::
-
Alright. Pick yourself up and live your life. You can do it. It's all about just putting yourself around people and it'll get better. You'll be "normal" again.
-
On 2005-09-26 04:24:00, Perrigaud wrote:
"Alright. Pick yourself up and live your life. You can do it. It's all about just putting yourself around people and it'll get better. You'll be "normal" again."
P Dog, surly you are not refering to me? As you know am (fairly) normal. And I do live my life, however these realizations and life changes are new to me and it sounds like they are to you too. The more I talk about it and stuff the more sense it all makes. Its not that Im a wreck or anything. Instead of feeling guilt though Im feeling anger. Ever since I realized how brainwashed I really was my life has been SOOO much better, and you know this man! Im supprised to hear you talk about this. I thought you were still all gung ho about all that??
Amanda
Dont muisunderstand, I you are my buddy, I hope Im not coming off like a bitch!
-
I look at it this way. At the time in my life that other girls were doing disco, I was fed on another, even more bizarre culture. What a rotten thing to do to a kid.
But it happens to the best of us. That's the amazing thing. If you wander around these forums for awhile and get to know the regulars, we're a pretty random, diverse crowd. Not particularly dumb or smart, rich or poor, either gender, gay or straight, wild partiers or tee totalers, religious and athiests. But even those who consistently resisted had some expert tweaking done on our young internal switches.
And the mechanizms used on us were not alien technology or Dr. Moreau scifi. It's more like a perversion of normal, healthy social reflexes. If you understand how it works, you can see it coming a mile away.
Maybe 3 years after I got out, I fell for one of those job listings some pyramid marketing companies use to lure in desperate prospects. Soon as I got there I realized I was being kept waiting for my "appointment" which I would evidently be sharing w/ at least a dozen other applicants. Then came the rah rah meeting.
Then I knew it wasn't a job, but I just had to ride awhile to see where it went. That was a real eye opener! It was, down to the last detail, the same mindfuck. At the end of the day, my trainer told me he'd be in some kind of trouble if he brought me back to my car before he met his quota. That was after he told me he'd mortgaged the house and sold the family business in order to ensure success in his new enterprise, selling knock off perfume up and down the beach.
I shit you not, that was one of the more educational and entertaining days of my life. Marijuana in its natural form is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be safely used within the supervised routine of medical care.
Administrative Law Judge, Francis Young, DOJ/DEA
-
Gung Ho? That's cute. Put it this way. I see both sides. I'm talking to anyone that has a hard time adjusting. I think I kinda sound like a bitch. I think that some of it applied and a lot didn't. I think that it was a too much for a lot of people. Am I for it? No. Am I against it? Yes. Why? Because it's too harmful.
Thing is, shit happens to everyone. Everyone's got a sob story. Life isn't easy. It's damn hard. It all boils down to; are you going to let it bring you down? Or are you going to roll with the punches. Knock every problem out as they come? There are a lot of fuckers in this world. However, those real shitty times sure do help you to appreciate the nice and easy times no? Yes. Life is not a big mystery. Live your life. Make mistakes, learn, grow, enjoy, laugh, cry, get mad, get sad, and appreciate.
Amanda, you have it in you to get over the shit that your stepmother put you through. What she does sucks. But there's no changing her. Do what you need to do and never be like her.
-
On 2005-09-27 01:39:00, Perrigaud wrote:
"Gung Ho? That's cute. Put it this way. I see both sides. I'm talking to anyone that has a hard time adjusting. I think I kinda sound like a bitch. I think that some of it applied and a lot didn't. I think that it was a too much for a lot of people. Am I for it? No. Am I against it? Yes. Why? Because it's too harmful.
Thing is, shit happens to everyone. Everyone's got a sob story. Life isn't easy. It's damn hard. It all boils down to; are you going to let it bring you down? Or are you going to roll with the punches. Knock every problem out as they come? There are a lot of fuckers in this world. However, those real shitty times sure do help you to appreciate the nice and easy times no? Yes. Life is not a big mystery. Live your life. Make mistakes, learn, grow, enjoy, laugh, cry, get mad, get sad, and appreciate.
Amanda, you have it in you to get over the shit that your stepmother put you through. What she does sucks. But there's no changing her. Do what you need to do and never be like her. "
The thing is, we have talked alot about this and when I mention brainwashing or how the program is harmful you got really upset and even refused to talk about it you got so mad at me. SO the reason I ask is this new attitude towards the program is a new thing to me.
Have you ever been abused by your parents Ash? I have. It is a horrible thing. You know, sometimes it takes a lifetime to "get over" how horrible someone treats you. Its like Brian. You know what hes been through and its not pretty. But you dont tell him to just get over it. You have given him time to make mistakes over and over. You are patient with him. I thought you would be able to do the same for me. Its not like Im angry at you or anything, but one minuit you are getting incredibly angry with me about my new ideas about the program, and the next you are giving me advice about moving on from my horrible experience like you agree with me. Its just confusing.
And I dont think all the time something tragic or bad happening to you makes your life richer and makes you appreciate things more. Do you think the people that survived the genocide in Rawanda were greatful that they were alive? Maybe they were, but their lives were shattered non the less. I dont think the program had anything postive for me. I wasnt able to take the "good" away from it because now I see it was all bullshit, a fake sense of security and identity. I am now having to re bulid myself and its set me back quite a while. So no, Im not greatful for going there and Im not able to "take the good from it". If anything Im just glad I met my friends there that I care for. However, I really wish it could have been under different circumstances.
Dont misunderstand me friend. I love you and you are my buddy. But this whole program thing has been a sore spot ever since I changed my mind. And I just feel a little bit confused about your new attitude is all. I understand your ideas about overcomeing obstacles and all that, as you havnt had the easiest life ever! But telling me I have the power to move on from it and the advice you gave sounded a little bit patronizing. Thats all. You know me and you know that I do live my life and I do what you suggested on a daily basis. But its not that simple.
-
Hey I hope I didnt come off as attacking you. I understand what you are saying and Im sure you didnt mean to come off any way other than helpful. Just needed to say that.
Amanda
-
Crimeny Amanda! I'm not trying to sound patronizing. If you want to take it that way then ok. I'm not here to fluff anything up for anyone. I was merely giving you encouragement and support. Guess it came out wrong.
Damnit Amanda don't let your bitch (sorry for the explicit language but that's what she is)of a stepmother bring you down. The woman doesn't deserve any kind of recognition be it negative or not.
Ok, I'm here for you in any way you need. I'm not here to minimize your situations at all. I'm sorry if I came off in a mean way. It just kills me to see you hurt. I am patient and will continue to be so with you. We kinda understand each other in a....different specific situational way. :wink:
I love you Amanda. I'm here for you.