Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => Facility Question and Answers => Topic started by: wonderwoman2112 on November 12, 2008, 02:45:18 AM
-
I've been reading this discussion forum long enough to get the generally held idea re: RTCs and Therapeutic Boarding Schools. But I haven't read anything on actual rehab facilities for teens and young adults. I have an 18 yr old whose drug problem is spiralling out of control...dropped out of high school, won't get a job, won't get a GED. Just gets wasted all night and then sleeps all day. Is stealing money and drugs from us and lying constantly. Disappears for days on end. This is going nowhere but toward tragedy. I'm scared to death of these facilities that won't let you talk to you kid for weeks on end. If anyone can recommend some rehabs, I'd greatly appreciate it. There is nothing in my area for young adults.
Thanks!!!
-
Ask yourself this:
1) Is your kid actually a strung out junkie or a recreational user?
2) Is this a phase they probably will grow out of on their own?
3) If they actually do have a real problem with drugs does your kid want to kick that habit?
Now by problem I'm not talking the angst ridden emo cheetoh munching dope smokers.
that's a friggin phase that hits the road as soon as the kid has to get a job.
i'm talking the hard core oding and crazy shit...
Remember, bottom line here is if your kid does have a problem they really do have to want to kick it. If you send them to a rehab you are probably only going to end inflaming the problem.
I personally don't like rehabs due to their tendency to push Narc Anon onto the residents. Further, who the heck wants to be labeled a junkie the rest of their lives?
Maybe if you posted your general geographical location someone could pm you some ideas. There are places your child can get help if they really have a problem and if they really want to deal with it.
If it is a phase though.. sheesh.. tell em to go get a job to buy their own damn pretorn emo pants and matching emo t-shirt.
Sorry.. i think emo is the dumbest fashion trend to date and I favor rounding up the little bastards and giving out mass haircuts.
sigh.. damn I got old.
bleh.
#gramps wobbles off waving his cane and hollering at small children and dogs....
-
Oh wait..
18?
He's an adult..
Make him act like one.
He can pay you rent or find his own place. Stuffing him in a program will only deprive him of a badly needed experience with reality.
bottom line though.. make sure.. absolutely make sure you tell him as often as you can that you love him, you are proud of him no matter what he does, but at some point he has to go be his own man.
Stop focusing on the nonsense and get him focusing on being an adult.
Just remember though.. this isn't throwing him out for his own good in some sicko tough love fashion. This is helping him make the transition from child to adult. That doesn't have to be one he does completely alone, but he has to do it.
Support the dude from the distance.. cheer him on.. give advice..
hmmm..
ran out of ideas...
Good luck.
-
Something like what Che said. It sounds like your kid is depressed and perhaps that's why he is using drugs to excess and sleeping all day... but he is 18. Maybe you should ask him to move out if he's stealing and affecting you directly. Agree to pay for an apartment for a few months until he can find a job and support himself. It's a lot cheaper than a program and, at least in my experience, will probably have a much greater chance of success. It's critical, though, that if you say you do something, you do it. If he senses that he can mooch off you indefinitely, he just might, so when you say the money will stop flowing at point X, you have to do it. If he knows you will pull the plug on funds, he'll have no choice but to get himself a job and begin to support himself. Normally, I might not be so harsh, but if he's stealing from you, that isn't cool, and you should not have to tolerate that.
As for his drug usage of abuse? Well. Thats his problem (or not), not yours. He is the owner of his own body. If he decides for himself that he has a problem, he can get himself help (I would suggest Rational Recovery or almost any other program of self help, but not AA/NA which has a disastrous success rate (often worse than nothing at all)). Pressure from you shouldn't be an issue in his decision (it will only build resentment, and won't factor into a decision of really wanting to quit. If you've ever smoked cigarettes, would desire is a requisite to quitting.). Respect his choice and agree to support him in the apt for the time you agree upon regardless of what he chooses to put in his body. On his own, it's not your concern, it's his. If he can use drugs and succeed in life, more power to him (there are a lot who do).
-
First question: Does he acknowledge his drug use?
If he dont, kick him out or hire a powerful interventionst.
You can drag a horse to the water, but you can't make it drink. As the bald guy on telly also states: "You can only change what you acknowledge as a problem".
You cannot start drugrehab before he states to you: "I have a problem". So dont even bother reading the text below if he doesn't.
Second: Drug rehab where you are in all the way until after-care.
Call Soltreks (http://http://www.soltreks.com) or some other wilderness program with a FAMILY program.
Ask them where to hire a cabin in their neighborhood. Get some of your family members to take you and your son to this cabin and leave you there for a week or so. If you are several working shifts, it would be better. There is only one rule. He must not go near other people or shopping. Just to make the time go, go for a hike. It would help him to sweat out some of the drugs and it wouldn't be so boring.
Week 2 it is time for the wilderness. It only needs to last a week, because most of the poison is out of his body. Don't expect any breaktroughs during week 1 because his brain is drugged up. The first week is always a waste of money. Ask any wilderness instructor to confirm this. But because you have kept him isolated as in any program the first week, you can get value for your money by this approach.
By participating in the wilderness your self, then if he dies like many of the teenagers over the years, you also die. Because you are the person with the money it would unlikely for the program to let you die. You or your wallet become the life insurrance for your boy.
If his problems have something to do with self-esteem ask the wilderness program if the know a place where you can rent some hours in a high-rope course track or if they know a place suitable for gorge jumping, which you can do AFTER the course. Remember, that you have to do it as well as him.
When the wilderness program is done with your boy is ready for aftercare. You must have a AA or NA meeting going on in your town. If he messes the after-care phase up, he is 18 and can be kicked out.
-
I disagree with the above. First off, if you force, bribe, or otherwise coerce him into "treatment", it'll fail because he will resist. Secondly, if you force a person to admit they have a "problem" when they may very well not (just be depressed, for example), you're going to be left with a kid who, for all intents and purposes, will have a problem since he will view himself as an "addict" and act accordingly whether or not that was true to begin with (self fulfilling prophecy). Often times, drug usage is an effect, rather than a cause in itself. AA and NA don't treat the root cause of an addiction, rather they concede defeat and say one must admit powerlessness over the substance and take things one day at a time. The results of this are disastrous. In a controlled study (Brandsma et. al.) on AA, there were three control groups of court mandated offenders (i.e. forced, like your kid would be). One group went to AA. One group had rational behavior therapy (similar to Rational Recovery) and one group had no treatment at all. The AA group did NINE TIMES as much binge drinking as the RBT group and FIVE TIMES binge drinking as the group who had no recovery "treatment" of any sort at all. This is hardly the only study on AA/NA. For more on AA's effectiveness, either check out this chapter in this book. (link) (http://http://www.morerevealed.com/library/coc/chapter7.htm) or, this page (link) (http://http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-effectiveness.html). It's popular because it's cheap and free and it's adherents follow and spread it with a religious fervor (Courts have found it to be a religion, techincally (http://http://orange-papers.org/orange-spirrel.html#judges)). Twelve step is not, however, based on either science or common sense.
I also disagree with the above stuff regarding wilderness. There are no and have never been any studies showing wilderness "therapy" works other than to give parents a romantic feeling that somehow some indian "teen whisperer" is going to magically turn your son into who you want him to be. It's as absurd as it sounds, but sells well since it's what parents desire. More or less, they just want your money, and there is a lot of money in the forced "treatment" industry. Please keep that in mind at all times. There is no need for your son to "detox" unless that is exactly what he wants and requests on his own without pressure or coercion. It's his choice, and you'll do more harm than good by forcing it.
Again, I can't emphasize enough: resist the impulse to try and control your son. Has it worked so far? Have you tried? Do you really think anybody can force long lasting change on another? Sure, programs can use tried and true thought reform techniques (brainwashing) to provide temporary results similar to those in Chinese re-education groups (probably not what you think, if you've done research into it), but those "results" are only as long lasting as the kid remains inside the controlled milieu (it will, however leave scars for life). Even if permanent forced change were possible, again, it wouldn't be ethical. Your son, as a human being, deserves the right to choose his own path, whether that be sober or not. Offer to pay for an apartment for a few months, give him some cash to settle down, and set him on his way. He'll survive. If he fails, chances are the only way he'll learn is by doing just that.
-
As the bald guy on telly also states: "You can only change what you acknowledge as a problem".
The bald guy on the telly (Dr. Phil) is a LifeSpring devotee who runs his own Lifespring clone LGATs (http://http://pagesperso-orange.fr/eldon.braun/awareness/) (Pathways). He is also not a doctor. Dr Phil is to psychology as televangelism is to religion (all about the money, ratings, power, and little about helping people or substance).
-
To psy:
I did write that he has to state that he has a problem before anything can start.
As for the wilderness. I have seen people detoxing in a super luxus cabin with spa, sauna etc. Maybe it is enough for some, but other just need the hike because there is only so much to do in a cabin.
I have even had people detoxing at home in their own appartment on their own without any support, but this mother doesn't know whether her son owns money so some drug lord who will give him some manicure by chopping some of his fingers off as they do here in Finland.
Those I have helped have benefitted by taking some time off from their daily life. They came to me, they got help, I dont know how much they use or of what reason they became user unless they like to tell me. It is not my business to know anything about them. I am not judging people. Everybody can loose control in a globalized world where none stops to take a breath of fresh air. Drug- and alcohol abuse is not a serious matter. They are symptoms of stress, depression or an old too heavy mental backpack, because people havn't learn how to dump all those bumps everybody runs into during life. Of course their can be severe cases, where people hear voices or cut themselves for more than mental haemorrhage. For those more severe cases, we have hospitals for that where they can be treated with the respect they deserve.
As for the AA/NA. Acknowledge that your country is not as developed as the nordic countries where the government offers group therapy for former drugs user WITHOUT RAP. Our heathcare system are over that stage where you have make group therapy something dramatic. Of course a tear can drop whenever the issues debated are hard, but none are pushing people to put something on the table angainst their will.
Being on a third world standard regarding drug treatment, what can you offer?
To Guest: Yes. The ball guy is "Doctor" phil. That's why I never use his name. His doctor title is fake. But if he let the teenagers he ships off to various hellholes, a little slack and actually used what he states, they wouldn't go anywhere. I have seen none - absolutely none - of those teenagers acknowledging that they had a problem before they were detained. I know - based on people in difficult situations during my life - that this statement is correct. So why doesn't he use it?
-
Volunteer medical based drug rehab is not the same as coercive adolescent behavior mod programs. There are some similarities, but grouping them all together as the same is dishonest. The kid is 18, so you cannot force them into treatment, it's up to them whether they want help or not.
As I see it you have three options:
1. Don't do anything. Wait and hope he grows out of it and things get better. He can always get his GED and start college in a year, or two, or five.
2. Tell the kid they either have to go to drug rehab, or they are kicked out in 30 days. That will give them time to consider their options, and figure out where to live if they choose not to receive treatment.
3. Kick them out immediately, and hope for the best. This is the classic "tough love" approach. Depending on how "tough" you want to be, you could call the cops on them and report the thefts and drug use. I wouldn't suggest that, but it is an option.
I would probably choose option #2. Even if you are bluffing about kicking them out, at least it will get them thinking about the idea of getting help, you can plant the seed and hopefully it will grow into a realization that drug abuse and stealing from family is not the sort of person they want to be.
You probably are not going to receive names of specific drug rehab facilities here, since the forum focuses on adolescents for the most part. Medical based drug rehab that uses a combination of psychology, psychiatry, and AA/NA are widely available for people of any economic means. Google is a good source for finding local facilities. The worries you have from reading this forum are more applicable to programs that deal with minors. If your kid feels they are being harassed in treatment, they can simply leave and call you and explain what happened. Drug rehabs usually allow daily visiting, and uncensored phone calls, so you don't have to worry about that. You can see him daily if you choose to.
As to the strange post talking about taking a camping trip, ignore that. This is the same ideology and methodology employed by wilderness programs, and is little more than a glorified vacation. There is already a system that exists to treat drug abuse, there is no good reason to dismiss it. Try your local hospital and see if they have a 30 day rehab, medical insurance should cover it.
Guest
-
To psy:
I did write that he has to state that he has a problem before anything can start.
Never said you did. But have you ever known a program to let a person progress without admitting to a "problem"? So maybe I think you're a communist. Never mind defending yourself, you are. I know it because everybody from Finland is a commie! I know it because I was once a commie and a commie knows a commie! A dirty commie socialist, just like "that one" in the white house! And I'm going to send you off to a re-education camp within which you will not progress until you admit you are a dirty commie. Maybe after a while you might actually start to believe you were a communist. Maybe after the re-education you would start to hook up with other "communists" because they told you that you were one and you naturally associate with those who you believe you will fit. You get where I am going with this? Most programs in the US don't help people to admit they have a problem. The force them. They more or less say "you will not leave here until you admit you have a problem and furthermore you will DIE on the outside if you do not submit to this program!" Problem is, not everybody who uses drugs has a drug problem. Sometimes it's just a phase, or caused by depression, or any number of factors.
Explain the AA study I quoted in the previous post. how did that happen? In my opinion, the reason more binge drink in AA as opposed to on their own is because they come to believe that they are weaker and more messed up than they actually are (in fact, they're encouraged to come to that conclusion). When a person might recover on their own, to send them into an environment where they very likely might do worse is irresponsible.
but this mother doesn't know whether her son owns money so some drug lord who will give him some manicure by chopping some of his fingers off as they do here in Finland.
Well, then that is the kid's problem. If the kid is smart, he'll stay away from those kind of folk, but ultimately, it's his life to live and his mistakes to make. The least the mother can do is give him a chance on his own at success without other influences to try to "change" him to what the thinks he should be.
Those I have helped have benefitted by taking some time off from their daily life. They came to me, they got help, I dont know how much they use or of what reason they became user unless they like to tell me. It is not my business to know anything about them. I am not judging people. Everybody can loose control in a globalized world where none stops to take a breath of fresh air. Drug- and alcohol abuse is not a serious matter. They are symptoms of stress, depression or an old too heavy mental backpack, because people havn't learn how to dump all those bumps everybody runs into during life.
Well, i'm glad you acknowledge that. It's far more effective to treat the route cause than a symptom.
Of course their can be severe cases, where people hear voices or cut themselves for more than mental haemorrhage. For those more severe cases, we have hospitals for that where they can be treated with the respect they deserve.
As for the AA/NA. Acknowledge that your country is not as developed as the nordic countries where the government offers group therapy for former drugs user WITHOUT RAP.
note to parent: RAP refers to a form of attack therapy (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_therapy) practiced in many US programs.
I freely acknowledge that. The system in the United States is messed. You don't have to tell me that. That being said, you're only proving my point: in Finland, drug treatment might be a little bit different than it is in the United States. You might know what works there, on Fins, but what works and does not work here is a different story.
Our heathcare system are over that stage where you have make group therapy something dramatic. Of course a tear can drop whenever the issues debated are hard, but none are pushing people to put something on the table angainst their will.
Being on a third world standard regarding drug treatment
HAH! That may be, but you live in a nanny state (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanny_state).
what can you offer?
To Guest: Yes. The ball guy is "Doctor" phil. That's why I never use his name. His doctor title is fake. But if he let the teenagers he ships off to various hellholes, a little slack and actually used what he states, they wouldn't go anywhere. I have seen none - absolutely none - of those teenagers acknowledging that they had a problem before they were detained. I know - based on people in difficult situations during my life - that this statement is correct. So why doesn't he use it?
It's almost as if you are justifying detaining teens just to get confessions out of them. The ends justify the means, right?
-
Volunteer medical based drug rehab is not the same as coercive adolescent behavior mod programs. There are some similarities, but grouping them all together as the same is dishonest. The kid is 18, so you cannot force them into treatment, it's up to them whether they want help or not.
And yet you suggest number 2 (do this or else). So If I hold a gun to your head and say "do this or I pull the trigger", you have a choice, right? If that's your logic than forcing anybody to do anything is impossible. I'm not against the kid getting treatment if that's what he decides on his own, if that's what he wants. I'm against forced treatment of any kind whatsoever. I believe a person owns his or her own body absolutely, and nobody has a right to interfere with what person does with it. I'm against coercing him into the decision for reasons I have elaborated above, both practical and ideological. Forced (this includes the coercion you're talking about) treatment does not work. If the kid, on his own fails and decides he has a problem on his own and wants treatment, then it's far more likely that he'll be able to quit. If the kid decides to go to AA on his own, after realizing for himself that he has a problem (if he does), than that's his decision. I would highly recommend against it (many better alternatives), given the success rate of 12 step programs, but If it's his decision, so be it. Have you ever researched the success rate of 12 step programs compared to alternatives or no treatment at all?
Do you have a problem with giving the kid rent in an apt for a few months to get started and letting him live his life as he chooses, as I suggested? It's giving him a chance to (I hate this term), "sink or swim".
-
And yet you suggest number 2 (do this or else). So If I hold a gun to your head and say "do this or I pull the trigger", you have a choice, right? If that's your logic than forcing anybody to do anything is impossible.
Giving them 30 days to move out, or go to rehab is not the same as putting a gun to someone's head. Presenting an adult who is 18 with a choice, to either abide by the house rules and refrain from lying/stealing money and drugs, or move out, is not that much to ask. Being shot and killed, and being asked to move out of your parents house is not an accurate comparison in my view.
I'm not against the kid getting treatment if that's what he decides on his own, if that's what he wants. I'm against forced treatment of any kind whatsoever. I believe a person owns his or her own body absolutely, and nobody has a right to interfere with what person does with it.
You cannot force an adult into drug treatment, it's not possible unless they are declared mentally unfit by a judge. You can force a kid under 18 into a program. Call up the escorts, and have them shipped away, easy. This is not possible with a legal adult. They must sign themselves in, and they can leave at any time.
I'm against coercing him into the decision for reasons I have elaborated above, both practical and ideological. Forced (this includes the coercion you're talking about) treatment does not work.
I disagree. When people are addicted to drugs they are not in a frame of mind to make logical and rational choices. That is why a good person can steal from their family to get drugs or money, because their addiction drives their choices instead of logic. We are all coerced in our daily lives. We don't speed in fear of traffic tickets. We don't skip work in fear of losing our job. We don't kill in fear of jail. Coercion is different than force, and is a part of our daily lives.
If the kid, on his own fails and decides he has a problem on his own and wants treatment, then it's far more likely that he'll be able to quit.
The addiction to drugs can outweigh any concern to get better. This can lead to overdose and death, hopelessness and suicide.
If the kid decides to go to AA on his own, after realizing for himself that he has a problem (if he does), than that's his decision. I would highly recommend against it (many better alternatives), given the success rate of 12 step programs, but If it's his decision, so be it. Have you ever researched the success rate of 12 step programs compared to alternatives or no treatment at all?
Most drug addicted people do not realize they have a problem, and if they do it is often too late. You can know you're an addict in need of help, and still not do anything about it. I don't see what is wrong with a family steering this person's choice towards treatment. If this was your kid, would you really suggest you just leave it alone? I would beg, plead, and if necessary coerce my kid into drug treatment if they were addicted to drugs and stealing/lying to me to support their habit.
Do you have a problem with giving the kid rent in an apt for a few months to get started and letting him live his life as he chooses, as I suggested? It's giving him a chance to (I hate this term), "sink or swim".
This would be setting up the kid for failure. We have been told this kid is stealing drugs and money from his family. Setting him up with a free apartment will only make things worse. The apartment will become a 'drug pad' and used until the free money runs out. Rewarding someone for negative behavior is setting the wrong tone.
This is the perfect time for a family to intervene, and make it clear to the kid that they need to change. If they do not change, the family will no longer financially support and subsidize a drug addiction or be lied to and robbed.
I would only offer this paid-for apartment situation after 30 day drug treatment, and on condition that the kid make a good-faith effort to remain sober, while also keeping in mind that relapses do happen. To completely ignore a problem that has progressed to the point of theft and dishonesty, and expect it to go away on it's own is sweeping the dust under the rug and calling it clean.
-
And yet you suggest number 2 (do this or else). So If I hold a gun to your head and say "do this or I pull the trigger", you have a choice, right? If that's your logic than forcing anybody to do anything is impossible.
Giving them 30 days to move out, or go to rehab is not the same as putting a gun to someone's head. Presenting an adult who is 18 with a choice, to either abide by the house rules and refrain from lying/stealing money and drugs, or move out, is not that much to ask. Being shot and killed, and being asked to move out of your parents house is not an accurate comparison in my view.
You are missing the point. A choice "or else" is not truly a choice. It's called duress. Look it up. If I made you sign a contract under the same circumstances you described to me, it would be void. Whether saying "you get treatment or else" is coercion or force is quibbling about words. For all intents and purposes, it's "forced". Answer me this: do you really think the kid is going to do better if:
A. he fails on his own ( IF and that's a big IF ) and decides he needs to help himself
B. somebody says "you will get help for a problem I say you have or else"
I disagree. When people are addicted to drugs they are not in a frame of mind to make logical and rational choices.
Well, if that were true, we'd have to hold people innocent for crimes they commit under the influence if they were "addicts". But that's not the way the law works. People are responsible for their actions. To blame a drug alcohol "addiction" is a scapegoat and a poor one at that. Do you have any evidence drugs directly forced (forced.. remember your definition) that kid to steal his parents money / property?
The addiction to drugs can outweigh any concern to get better. This can lead to overdose and death, hopelessness and suicide.
I was afriad you were going to say "dead insane in jail". You have any evidence this kid is an "addict", or are you just diagnosing him over the internet. Are you a doctor (and yes, addiction is a medical problem which requires a medical diagnosis)? I'm saying "give him a chance to suceed on his own and make his own path" you are saying "NO! Control him!".
Most drug addicted people do not realize they have a problem, and if they do it is often too late. You can know you're an addict in need of help, and still not do anything about it. I don't see what is wrong with a family steering this person's choice towards treatment.
Steering is one thing. Saying "you will do this or else" is another.
If this was your kid, would you really suggest you just leave it alone?
Yes, because first off, it's not my body. Are you pro life or pro choice? why? Secondly, I could not predict the future and there would be no way for me to know whether he would succeed or not. Fear of the unknown is something that is part and parcel with parenthood. I've already covered my objections in terms of program success rates.
I would beg, plead, and if necessary coerce my kid into drug treatment if they were addicted to drugs and stealing/lying to me to support their habit.
What is your background, if you don't mind me asking?
Do you have a problem with giving the kid rent in an apt for a few months to get started and letting him live his life as he chooses, as I suggested? It's giving him a chance to (I hate this term), "sink or swim".
This would be setting up the kid for failure. We have been told this kid is stealing drugs and money from his family. Setting him up with a free apartment will only make things worse. The apartment will become a 'drug pad' and used until the free money runs out.
So you can tell the future? He will fail on his own, with such certainty. It's almost religious in nature. Tell me. Are you an AA/NA/Al-anon member? You are suggesting restricting somebody from having a chance to make their own decisions because you claim that if they do they will certainly make choices you disapprove of. Well. You don't know that. You really don't. In any case, the kid has a right to live as he wants on his own (the short term apt until he finds his job is a courtesy).
This is the perfect time for a family to intervene, and make it clear to the kid that they need to change. If they do not change, the family will no longer financially support and subsidize a drug addiction or be lied to and robbed.
Who says he will spend his money on a drug addiction? I'm saying the parents should pay for an apt for a few months, give him some cash to start off (if he chooses to spend it on drugs, that's his business) and let him on his own. That's not subsidizing anything explicity. It's saying "here is an opportunity to make something of your life. Here is an apartment and some cash. Do with it what you will. This is the last you will get from us We will love you always and if you ever feel like you need comfort or aid, we will always be here to comfort and love you, but we can no longer have you in the house because of your theft. You have a right to put what you want in your own body, but should you feel you need help, will will support you in a rehabilitation program of your choosing."
I would only offer this paid-for apartment situation after 30 day drug treatment, and on condition that the kid make a good-faith effort to remain sober, while also keeping in mind that relapses do happen. To completely ignore a problem that has progressed to the point of theft and dishonesty, and expect it to go away on it's own is sweeping the dust under the rug and calling it clean.
It's not ignoring it. It's dealing with it. If he's not in the house he cannot steal from them. I am not suggesting asking him to move out because of what he chooses to put in his body. I am suggesting the parents ask him to move out because of the stealing. that is it. What he chooses to put in his own body is irrelevant to his actions.
-
Answer me this: do you really think the kid is going to do better if:
A. he fails on his own ( IF and that's a big IF ) and decides he needs to help himself
B. somebody says "you will get help for a problem I say you have or else"
If he fails on his own, that could mean death depending on what drugs we are talking about. He might not know that people are willing to help him at that point, or how or where to get help from. Sometimes it is necessary to offer an ultimatum to encourage the person to get help. The "or else" in this case is justified.
Well, if that were true, we'd have to hold people innocent for crimes they commit under the influence if they were "addicts". But that's not the way the law works. People are responsible for their actions. To blame a drug alcohol "addiction" is a scapegoat and a poor one at that. Do you have any evidence drugs directly forced (forced.. remember your definition) that kid to steal his parents money / property?
If you drive drunk and kill someone you are not charged with murder, but with vehicular manslaughter which has a greatly reduced sentence.
The posters told us that the kid is stealing drugs from them, and money. I'm assuming they are talking about prescription medication.
I was afriad you were going to say "dead insane in jail". You have any evidence this kid is an "addict", or are you just diagnosing him over the internet. Are you a doctor (and yes, addiction is a medical problem which requires a medical diagnosis)? I'm saying "give him a chance to suceed on his own and make his own path" you are saying "NO! Control him!".
I'd say jail most likely, dead is the worst outcome. These things do happen to people who are addicted to drugs and never get help or change their behavior. Whether I'm right about the kid being addicted or not is irrelevant, because like you said it is up to a doctor to decide, which he will see if entered into a 30 day drug rehab. If he gets a free apartment for him and his friends to get high all day long in until the free money runs out, he will never see a doctor.
Steering is one thing. Saying "you will do this or else" is another.
How else can you get a person addicted to drugs to enter rehab? Drugs have a strong allure and if left to their own devices, a drug addict will choose drugs over rehab almost 100%. Not because rehab is such a terrible thing, but because they want to keep getting high. Sure you can just let them be, but with that comes risks. In my opinion, the risk of entering a medically based 30 day rehab is less than the risks associated with doing nothing. Again, assuming that the kid h as a drug problem.
Yes, because first off, it's not my body. Are you pro life or pro choice? why? Secondly, I could not predict the future and there would be no way for me to know whether he would succeed or not. Fear of the unknown is something that is part and parcel with parenthood. I've already covered my objections in terms of program success rates.
It is your house though as the parent. Are you going to let your kid steal your prescriptions and money from you and still do nothing? Let them stay out for days at a time, coming home only to 'crash' all the while holding steadfast to your ideological objections to 'coercive' drug treatment? For all we know this kid is addicted to meth, which would explain the staying out for days at a time and sleeping all day during crashes.
So you can tell the future? He will fail on his own, with such certainty. It's almost religious in nature. Tell me. Are you an AA/NA/Al-anon member? You are suggesting estricting somebody from having a chance to make their own decisions because you claim that if they do they will certainly make choices you disapprove of. Well. You don't know that. You really don't. In any case, the kid has a right to live as he wants on his own (the short term apt until he finds his job is a courtesy).
If the kid wanted a job, he could have one while living at home. The poster said kid dropped out of high school. What makes you think the behavior of the kid will suddenly and miraculously change when provided with an apartment? I don't claim to see the future. I am claiming that a individual prone to using drugs will not stop all of a sudden because they are provided with the facade of a sober life. Yes this kid has a right to live on their own, but the parents are not required to pay for it. No I am not an AA member.
Who says he will spend his money on a drug addiction?
The kid's actions tell us. He is willing to steal drugs and money from his family to support his habit. That means he is willing to compromise his own morals in order to feed an addiction. That shows us if he is handed money, that most likely it will go to the drugs.
I'm saying the parents should pay for an apt for a few months, give him some cash to start off (if he chooses to spend it on drugs, that's his business) and let him on his own. That's not subsidizing anything explicity.
It's not just his business, since the family is subsidizing it. What if he overdoses in the apartment from the huge batch of drugs he was able to buy with his cash handout? What if he invites his drug abusing friends to live in his apartment and one of them dies? The family would be responsible. Instead of setting up such a failure-prone situation, why not use the same money and energy to help them enter into treatment. They can offer the apartment and money when the kid shows they want, and are ready to start a normal sober life. Until then, it would just be another setting for the same behavior to continue.
It's saying "here is an opportunity to make something of your life. Here is an apartment and some cash. Do with it what you will. This is the last you will get from us We will love you always and if you ever feel like you need comfort or aid, we will always be here to comfort and love you, but we can no longer have you in the house because of your theft. You have a right to put what you want in your own body, but should you feel you need help, will will support you in a rehabilitation program of your choosing.
I think that is a noble idea, but it has to happen after the drug rehab. Otherwise the drug abuse will continue in the new apartment, and he will spend the cash on drugs. Not because he is a horrible person, but because that is how drugs work. They are addictive and people choose drugs over a normal and stable life. You can't buy your way out of drug addiction, you have to work on yourself first, and then rebuild your life.
We really are saying the same thing, but disagree on the particular details of the method. Providing an apartment and money is coercion just as my advice earlier. You also say that it's okay to kick the kid out because of theft. Well then why not get them into treatment, and treat the cause for why the theft occured in the first place. It's sort of like you want to ignore the drug component of the equation and fix the rest. I am saying the drug component is the cause of the rest, solve that, and the other problems will be no more.
It's not ignoring it. It's dealing with it. If he's not in the house he cannot steal from them. I am not suggesting asking him to move out because of what he chooses to put in his body. I am suggesting the parents ask him to move out because of the stealing. that is it. What he chooses to put in his own body is irrelevant to his actions.
What he puts in his body is the cause of his actions.
You say it's okay to kick him out for stealing, but then say it's necessary to provide an apartment free of charge and cash for a couple months. This doesn't make any sense to me. Giving him money will stop the theft, only because you are paying him off. That's sort of like paying money to street-living heroin addicts so they don't steal from the surrounding citizens and businesses. It solves the problem of theft and crime, but does nothing to solve the underlying problem of why the individual was required to steal in the first place. They can't work because they are addicted to drugs, but they need money for drugs, so they steal. You remove the drug component from that equation and the other problems solve themselves.
That is why I would suggest option #2, even if you don't mean it about kicking him out. At least get the gears in his mind moving, and get him thinking about improving his life for the better. You can't just buy him off, ignore the problem, and hope everything will magically solve itself.
In my opinion this would be the best case scenario.
Kid enters medically based rehab. 30 days minimum inpatient.
Kid finishes GED or High School while in rehab or soon after.
Kid returns to living at home while attending rehabs outpatient.
Living at home conditional on clean drug tests. I wouldn't kick a kid out for one dirty test since relapse is a part of recovery, but require they maintain a good faith effort to remain sober, attend outpatient rehab or therapy, and work on finishing school.
Get kid to disassociate from high school friends they got wasted with. Support the kid entering community college or university. Gets part time job.
After a year or so of improvement, then offer ,if financially allowable, to help get apartment and help them start their new sober life.
and finally,
enjoy knowing that you helped, with love and respect, your kid recover from a path that could of led them to a tragic fate.
-
Just to clarify. My parents was on the right side of the gun, when we dealt with commies (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_Civil_War#Red_and_White_terror). There are generally no regrets about that part of our history, because without it we wouldn't have a country today. However, it was something to think about and while we are right at the top in the world regarding education (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PISA_(student_assessment)), we have also been thinking about why we are the only country in the nordic countries who have school shootings after the millennium.
We havn't found the answer to that.
-
Answer me this: do you really think the kid is going to do better if:
A. he fails on his own ( IF and that's a big IF ) and decides he needs to help himself
B. somebody says "you will get help for a problem I say you have or else"
If he fails on his own, that could mean death depending on what drugs we are talking about.
Could (highly unlikely). But he has a right to screw up his life if that is what he chooses to do with it.
He might not know that people are willing to help him at that point, or how or where to get help from.
Read my last post, second to last paragraph, Italics.
If you drive drunk and kill someone you are not charged with murder, but with vehicular manslaughter which has a greatly reduced sentence.
You got your law screwed up there. Read up (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manslaughter#Involuntary_manslaughter).
Involuntary manslaughter / negligent homicide does not require a person to be drunk (it only requires negligence... for a person to ignore traffic laws, speed, drive crazy, and kill somebody as a result). Driving drunk is reckless. Driving with a blindfold is reckless. Driving while watching TV, doing nails, and talking on a cell phone is reckless. None of that has the requisite Mens Rea of intent to kill. If driving drunk always resulted in a reduced sentence, I don't doubt somebody round here would have downed a bottle of vodka and run over a whole slew of program directors and ed-cons a long time ago (@FBI: that was a joke).
I'd say jail most likely, dead is the worst outcome. These things do happen to people who are addicted to drugs and never get help or change their behavior. Whether I'm right about the kid being addicted or not is irrelevant, because like you said it is up to a doctor to decide, which he will see if entered into a 30 day drug rehab. If he gets a free apartment for him and his friends to get high all day long in until the free money runs out, he will never see a doctor.
Oh come off it. I knew plenty of stoners in college who did just find on their own. I even knew one guy who was heavy (really heavy) into crystal meth but quit on his own accord (he was the first to suggest to me that NA was cult-like. at that point I defended it until I did more research). The "druggies" worked and went to college like everybody else. What they did in their own private home is their business (and certainly not yours). Whether or not any of them (or this kid) needed/needs help is their decision and their decision alone. If people are able to smoke pot/do whatever drugs and succeed in life, who are you, I, or anybody, to interfere with that. Most grow out of it anyway (unless, of course, they get coerced into some cult (and yes, institutional AA fits the criteria for a cult (http://http://www.morerevealed.com/library/coc/chaptr10.htm)) that convinces them they have a progressive disease that will fucking KILL THEM creating a self fulfilling prophecy spiral of death).
Steering is one thing. Saying "you will do this or else" is another.
How else can you get a person addicted to drugs to enter rehab? Drugs have a strong allure and if left to their own devices, a drug addict will choose drugs over rehab almost 100%.
Then that is THEIR CHOICE!
Not because rehab is such a terrible thing, but because they want to keep getting high. Sure you can just let them be, but with that comes risks. In my opinion, the risk of entering a medically based 30 day rehab is less than the risks associated with doing nothing.
Ok. Back that up with independent studies.
Again, assuming that the kid h as a drug problem.
Yes, because first off, it's not my body. Are you pro life or pro choice? why? Secondly, I could not predict the future and there would be no way for me to know whether he would succeed or not. Fear of the unknown is something that is part and parcel with parenthood. I've already covered my objections in terms of program success rates.
It is your house though as the parent. Are you going to let your kid steal your prescriptions and money from you and still do nothing? Let them stay out for days at a time, coming home only to 'crash' all the while holding steadfast to your ideological objections to 'coercive' drug treatment? For all we know this kid is addicted to meth, which would explain the staying out for days at a time and sleeping all day during crashes.
And for all you know, he just doesn't like being around his parents for personal reasons, so he switches his sleep schedule around. You are speculating. I offered a solution to teh stealing anyway. Read my last post, second to last paragraph, italics.
So you can tell the future? He will fail on his own, with such certainty. It's almost religious in nature. Tell me. Are you an AA/NA/Al-anon member? You are suggesting estricting somebody from having a chance to make their own decisions because you claim that if they do they will certainly make choices you disapprove of. Well. You don't know that. You really don't. In any case, the kid has a right to live as he wants on his own (the short term apt until he finds his job is a courtesy).
If the kid wanted a job, he could have one while living at home.[/quote]
Why would he if he has no reason to. Give him a reason: survival.
The poster said kid dropped out of high school. What makes you think the behavior of the kid will suddenly and miraculously change when provided with an apartment? I don't claim to see the future. I am claiming that a individual prone to using drugs will not stop all of a sudden because they are provided with the facade of a sober life. Yes this kid has a right to live on their own, but the parents are not required to pay for it. No I am not an AA member.
Not required, true. But to selectively withhold support would be to persecute against him for his personal choices about his body. Read what this guy has to say about it (http://http://archive.salon.com/health/books/2000/01/10/addiction/index.html). Please read it. It might change your mind.
I really hate to question your qualifications (I put more weight on your arguments), but it would help me to understand where you are coming from in this regard. It does seem you have a lot of pre-existing conceptions about this issue and i'm wondering from where.
Who says he will spend his money on a drug addiction?
The kid's actions tell us. He is willing to steal drugs and money from his family to support his habit.
No. That's speculation. You don't know why he is stealing, and neither do I. It could be for any number of reasons (pay for a GF's abortion... any number of things).
That means he is willing to compromise his own morals in order to feed an addiction.
That assumes he had issues with stealing from his parents in the first place. Again, that's speculation. How many kids nowadays you know who would do that anyway?
That shows us if he is handed money, that most likely it will go to the drugs.
No. It shows you're really good with speculating.
I'm saying the parents should pay for an apt for a few months, give him some cash to start off (if he chooses to spend it on drugs, that's his business) and let him on his own. That's not subsidizing anything explicity.
It's not just his business, since the family is subsidizing it. What if he overdoses in the apartment from the huge batch of drugs he was able to buy with his cash handout?
That would be a tragedy, but ultimately his decison. Again, I recommend you read that salon.com article I linked to above.
What if he invites his drug abusing friends to live in his apartment and one of them dies? The family would be responsible.
Not true. It would be the fault of whatever idiot put too many drugs in his body.
Instead of setting up such a failure-prone situation, why not use the same money and energy to help them enter into treatment. They can offer the apartment and money when the kid shows they want, and are ready to start a normal sober life. Until then, it would just be another setting for the same behavior to continue.
Of the kid, realizing he has to hit the ground running and has to get a job to support himself, could start looking at life from a more responsible perspective. He might land a decent job, get out, meet people, increase his self esteem, decide to quit whatever he is doing on his own. There are any number of scenarios here, but the kid is an adult and he should be able to choose how he wants to live his life, whether that be sober or not.
It's saying "here is an opportunity to make something of your life. Here is an apartment and some cash. Do with it what you will. This is the last you will get from us We will love you always and if you ever feel like you need comfort or aid, we will always be here to comfort and love you, but we can no longer have you in the house because of your theft. You have a right to put what you want in your own body, but should you feel you need help, will will support you in a rehabilitation program of your choosing.
I think that is a noble idea, but it has to happen after the drug rehab. Otherwise the drug abuse will continue in the new apartment, and he will spend the cash on drugs. Not because he is a horrible person, but because that is how drugs work. They are addictive and people choose drugs over a normal and stable life. You can't buy your way out of drug addiction, you have to work on yourself first, and then rebuild your life.
Again, I would have to strongly disagree with you on that, as well as on your concept of addiction (see the article I linked to (http://http://archive.salon.com/health/books/2000/01/10/addiction/index.html)). I wonder where you got such concepts. Again, I would love to know a little more about your background in this area.
We really are saying the same thing, but disagree on the particular details of the method. Providing an apartment and money is coercion just as my advice earlier.
Well. Not really. I'm suggesting just giving it to him as a parting gift with no strings attached (something he can make a life off) and letting him go on his own from there, to succeed or fail.
You also say that it's okay to kick the kid out because of theft. Well then why not get them into treatment, and treat the cause for why the theft occured in the first place.
speculation
It's sort of like you want to ignore the drug component of the equation and fix the rest.
That's correct. Because I see blaming the drug as a scapegoat... a way to skirt personal responsibility. At the same time, I don't think it's anybody's business what he puts in his body. If he can use drugs and do well... more power to him. If he fails and feels drugs are causing him problems, he might want to quit on his own. Again, I know guys who have done that off some pretty hard drugs, but you never hear about that from the 12 step crowd since they claim it's impossible as a matter of dogma.
I am saying the drug component is the cause of the rest, solve that, and the other problems will be no more.
It's not ignoring it. It's dealing with it. If he's not in the house he cannot steal from them. I am not suggesting asking him to move out because of what he chooses to put in his body. I am suggesting the parents ask him to move out because of the stealing. that is it. What he chooses to put in his own body is irrelevant to his actions.
What he puts in his body is the cause of his actions.
Again, read this article (http://http://archive.salon.com/health/books/2000/01/10/addiction/index.html) on that, if you haven't clicked on my links yet. The guy interviewed more or less has very similar views to mine.
You say it's okay to kick him out for stealing, but then say it's necessary to provide an apartment free of charge and cash for a couple months. This doesn't make any sense to me.
Well. Throwing him out on the streets is unfair and guarantees failure. I think that's cruel of a parent to do. I believe when a kid leaves the house, he should at least have a chance at success. That's why I suggest the apt.
Giving him money will stop the theft, only because you are paying him off. That's sort of like paying money to street-living heroin addicts so they don't steal from the surrounding citizens and businesses. It solves the problem of theft and crime, but does nothing to solve the underlying problem of why the individual was required to steal in the first place. They can't work because they are addicted to drugs, but they need money for drugs, so they steal. You remove the drug component from that equation and the other problems solve themselves.
Coincidence does not mean causality. The crime/drug relationship is not as simple as you describe. I'd be glad to debate you on that, but in another thread. For now, if you haven't yet read the salon article, I highly recommend reading it as the author being interviewed says what I am trying to say with far more eloquence.
http://archive.salon.com/health/books/2 ... index.html (http://archive.salon.com/health/books/2000/01/10/addiction/index.html)
-
Interesting article, however I disagree with it's assertion that addiction is a choice. Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of people who die of lung cancer each year, the thousands who die of illicit drug overdoses, or the thousands who die of alcoholism. I wish that it were that simple, that all you had to do was change someone's environment and they would be cured. I wish it were as simple as a drug addict wishing and hoping they can get better, and the next day wake up cured from their addiction or compulsion.
But that is not how it works. It sounds good, and is a great theory, but I am doubting the author has very much first hand experience dealing with drug addiction and it's horrific consequences. Print out that article and give it to a twenty-something with no teeth and the face of a forty year old because they couldn't stop using meth, even if they desperately wanted to.
Now maybe this parent will take this radical approach of doing nothing and hoping for the best. If so I wish the best and hope it works. But there is also a tried and true method in place to help people just like her son who is having difficulties and can benefit from outside help.
In this case I think we can agree to disagree. I offered my advice based on what I know. If this kid doesn't have a drug problem, then obviously rehab is not the place for them, but this parent specifically asked about rehab. They said the kid is stealing drugs and money from them. This suggests there is a big problem, and that the kid is already a drug addict, or well on their way to becoming one. If the family steps in now, there is still hope. Or they can kick him out and hope for the best. It's their choice.
-
Interesting article, however I disagree with it's assertion that addiction is a choice. Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of people who die of lung cancer each year
I would, and I do, and I'm a smoker who chooses to smoke who has had relatives that have died of cancer. I don't blame it on "addiction". It would be easy to say "oh well... i'm addicted, I can't quit, so it's not my fault" but that's not really true. It's the easy way out but I don't believe it's honest. Truth is, I like cigarettes and I choose to smoke. I chose to start and I choose to continue. I choose not to quit since I don't have sufficient reason. Maybe if I did, I would, but no amount of pressure or threats from parents saying "don't smoke" would ever make me want to quit, which is really what's required to actually quit.
the thousands who die of illicit drug overdoses, or the thousands who die of alcoholism. I wish that it were that simple, that all you had to do was change someone's environment and they would be cured. I wish it were as simple as a drug addict wishing and hoping they can get better, and the next day wake up cured from their addiction or compulsion.
But that is not how it works. It sounds good, and is a great theory, but I am doubting the author has very much first hand experience dealing with drug addiction and it's horrific consequences. Print out that article and give it to a twenty-something with no teeth and the face of a forty year old because they couldn't stop using meth, even if they desperately wanted to.
Did I mention I have a good friend who used to be heavy into meth, and believes that addiction is a choice. He quit. He was on his own too. Just decided to quit. Family could care less what he does. He went to NA a couple times but was disgusted as he thought it was more of a cult than anything else and left. But he did quit using meth on his own. He has a beer once in a while too (though not to excess) so there goes that whole NA religion theory about 100% abstinence and a progressive disease. He now works for apple and is quite successful. In NA, that's a ... what's the NA success rate again? I'll let you bring that up.
Now maybe this parent will take this radical approach of doing nothing and hoping for the best. If so I wish the best and hope it works. But there is also a tried and true method in place to help people just like her son who is having difficulties and can benefit from outside help.
In this case I think we can agree to disagree. I offered my advice based on what I know. If this kid doesn't have a drug problem, then obviously rehab is not the place for them, but this parent specifically asked about rehab. They said the kid is stealing drugs and money from them. This suggests there is a big problem, and that the kid is already a drug addict, or well on their way to becoming one. If the family steps in now, there is still hope. Or they can kick him out and hope for the best. It's their choice.
Look. I think we've covered most of this, but i'll leave you with this quote from the article which is really what I wanted to highlight:
You have a right to engage in behaviors of your choice as long as you don't infringe upon my freedom. I think the libertarian dictum that one should be free to do whatever one wants as long as it's not at the expense of someone else is one we should abide by. My right to swing my fist ends precisely at my neighbor's nose; whether I'm using drugs or alcohol is essentially irrelevant. If some family member or friend is self-destructing using drugs, does that cause you harm? It causes you psychological and emotional harm, it's upsetting to you. But is that the same thing as some kind of criminal act? I don't think it is. I think that's part of the price we have to pay in a free society.
The kid deserves a chance to make his own life, whatever he chooses that to be.
-
I would, and I do, and I'm a smoker who chooses to smoke who has had relatives that have died of cancer. I don't blame it on "addiction".
So what do you blame their deaths on? Ignorance? Stubborness? Stupidity? It's well known how physically damaging cigarettes are for your health. In addition to lung cancer it causes a myriad of other problems, and is one of the leading causes of death. Why would people choose to end their life decades earlier than necessary? What is so redeeming about tobacco? They stink, they are dirty, they cost a lot of money, and on top of all that, they kill you. Why would people smoke if not for being addicted? It stops being cool when you are about 21, so I know that is not the reason.
It would be easy to say "oh well... i'm addicted, I can't quit, so it's not my fault" but that's not really true. It's the easy way out but I don't believe it's honest. Truth is, I like cigarettes and I choose to smoke. I chose to start and I choose to continue. I choose not to quit since I don't have sufficient reason. Maybe if I did, I would, but no amount of pressure or threats from parents saying "don't smoke" would ever make me want to quit, which is really what's required to actually quit.
Sufficient reason is that it will kill you decades earlier than if you didn't smoke. Lung cancer is not an easy way to go, that's a good reason to stop right there. It's an empowering thought to declare control over all aspects of your life, but it's just not true. If you smoke regularly, you are addicted, this is proven with science. They've done studies with monkeys choosing a regular supply of cocaine over food, and affection. Addiction is very real.
Did I mention I have a good friend who used to be heavy into meth, and believes that addiction is a choice. He quit. He was on his own too. Just decided to quit. Family could care less what he does. He went to NA a couple times but was disgusted as he thought it was more of a cult than anything else and left. But he did quit using meth on his own. He has a beer once in a while too (though not to excess) so there goes that whole NA religion theory about 100% abstinence and a progressive disease. He now works for apple and is quite successful. In NA, that's a ... what's the NA success rate again? I'll let you bring that up.
I have no idea what the NA success rate is. I never suggested that the parent force the kid to attend NA meetings. They are usually a component within a drug rehab setting, but only a small part of the overall treatment plan. Some people do better being around other sober people and making new friends that have similar goals.
What do you think the success rate for going cold turkey all by yourself is? That is going to be the lowest success rate out of any. Like I said before, it's hard to admit that we are powerless. It makes us feel weak, and not in control of our own destiny. It's empowering to proclaim an addiction as a choice, and most people do. If you ask most smokers why they smoke, I wonder how many are going to answer 'because I'm addicted'. I would expect to hear answers like 'it calms me down' or 'I cant quit or I get fat', but those are not good enough reasons to trade decades of your life. It's addictive, and the addicts are in denial. People in denial make excuses to continue their addiction.
You have a right to engage in behaviors of your choice as long as you don't infringe upon my freedom. I think the libertarian dictum that one should be free to do whatever one wants as long as it's not at the expense of someone else is one we should abide by. My right to swing my fist ends precisely at my neighbor's nose; whether I'm using drugs or alcohol is essentially irrelevant. If some family member or friend is self-destructing using drugs, does that cause you harm? It causes you psychological and emotional harm, it's upsetting to you. But is that the same thing as some kind of criminal act? I don't think it is. I think that's part of the price we have to pay in a free society.
The kid deserves a chance to make his own life, whatever he chooses that to be.
The kid is an adult, it's their choice whether or not they want to enter treatment. You said the kid should be kicked out for stealing. I say they should use the threat of kicking him out to coerce him into a medically based drug rehab, if the kid will not enter willingly from the get go. Since the end result would be the same if he denies treatment in both our suggestions, I do not see the harm in them at least trying. There is nothing inherently dangerous or damaging about drug rehab, I don't see what the issue is.
-
I would, and I do, and I'm a smoker who chooses to smoke who has had relatives that have died of cancer. I don't blame it on "addiction".
So what do you blame their deaths on? Ignorance? Stubborness? Stupidity? It's well known how physically damaging cigarettes are for your health. In addition to lung cancer it causes a myriad of other problems, and is one of the leading causes of death. Why would people choose to end their life decades earlier than necessary? What is so redeeming about tobacco? They stink, they are dirty, they cost a lot of money, and on top of all that, they kill you. Why would people smoke if not for being addicted? It stops being cool when you are about 21, so I know that is not the reason.
No, you really don't know that is the reason. Nicotine is a stimulant that helps me think. I find I'm more alert on it. Health concerns? I've never been much of a health nut. Just not worried about it, is all. I'm young and have plenty of time to quit. I'll quit before i'm 30.
It would be easy to say "oh well... i'm addicted, I can't quit, so it's not my fault" but that's not really true. It's the easy way out but I don't believe it's honest. Truth is, I like cigarettes and I choose to smoke. I chose to start and I choose to continue. I choose not to quit since I don't have sufficient reason. Maybe if I did, I would, but no amount of pressure or threats from parents saying "don't smoke" would ever make me want to quit, which is really what's required to actually quit.
Sufficient reason is that it will kill you decades earlier than if you didn't smoke. Lung cancer is not an easy way to go, that's a good reason to stop right there. It's an empowering thought to declare control over all aspects of your life, but it's just not true. If you smoke regularly, you are addicted, this is proven with science. They've done studies with monkeys choosing a regular supply of cocaine over food, and affection. Addiction is very real.
Sure physical and even psychological dependance exists, but that's not addiction. That's an urge. So is an itch. Nothing makes you scratch and if you ignore it, it will go away.
I have no idea what the NA success rate is.
What if I told you 12 step treatment actually does more harm than good, that it's sucess rate is equal to or worse than spontaneous remission, and that studies show it can actually increase some types of risky drinking behavior (bingeing). It's true:
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/coc/chapter7.htm (http://www.morerevealed.com/library/coc/chapter7.htm)
http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-effectiveness.html (http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-effectiveness.html)
I never suggested that the parent force the kid to attend NA meetings. They are usually a component within a drug rehab setting, but only a small part of the overall treatment plan.
I would dispute that. I contend it's a very large portion of treatment. It can also be cultic in an institutional setting (http://http://www.morerevealed.com/library/coc/chaptr10.htm).
Some people do better being around other sober people and making new friends that have similar goals.
What do you think the success rate for going cold turkey all by yourself is? That is going to be the lowest success rate out of any. Like I said before, it's hard to admit that we are powerless. It makes us feel weak, and not in control of our own destiny. It's empowering to proclaim an addiction as a choice, and most people do.
I realize full well the lure of empowerment and the extremes it can be taken to (Eg: lifeSpring, Scientology, other human potential groups), however you seem to swing far to the other end of the scale, proclaiming powerlessness. The truth of it all is somewhere in the middle (see my note on dependence about itching and scratching).
If you ask most smokers why they smoke, I wonder how many are going to answer 'because I'm addicted'. I would expect to hear answers like 'it calms me down' or 'I cant quit or I get fat', but those are not good enough reasons to trade decades of your life. It's addictive, and the addicts are in denial. People in denial make excuses to continue their addiction.
Lol. If I disagree with you, I must be an addict in denial. You sure you're not a twelve stepper? Ok. I disagree with all that, but even if it were true. It's still a person's right to choose. By the way, that whole "admit we are powerless" stuff is just learned helplessness. There is a real danger in a person who doesn't have a problem (who could quit without aid) "learning" that they cannot control themselves, that death is inevatable, etc. It creates a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The kid deserves a chance to make his own life, whatever he chooses that to be.
The kid is an adult, it's their choice whether or not they want to enter treatment. You said the kid should be kicked out for stealing. I say they should use the threat of kicking him out to coerce him into a medically based drug rehab, if the kid will not enter willingly from the get go. Since the end result would be the same if he denies treatment in both our suggestions, I do not see the harm in them at least trying. There is nothing inherently dangerous or damaging about drug rehab, I don't see what the issue is.
The issue is the coercion, and you don't seem to get why it's wrong to try to control what another person puts in their body. God forbid you run for public office. There are enough nannies in government as it is.
-
We are all coerced in our daily lives. We don't speed in fear of traffic tickets. We don't skip work in fear of losing our job. We don't kill in fear of jail. Coercion is different than force, and is a part of our daily lives.
Wow! This is very telling of your view of the world and your place in it. I speed sometimes if I feel comfortable driving faster than the posted limit. Even if I do worry that a cop might catch me at it, sometimes I'll do it anyway cause I'd rather suffer the consequences of getting busted than live with the knowledge that I'm a coward, doing stupid things for fear of some bully punishing me. I'll go slower than the posted limit, too, depending on conditions. I don't skip work without good cause because I take pride in my work and respect my coworkers. My employers know that they can count on me to cover someone else's need for time off and that if I call off there's a damned good reason. They usually don't even ask what that reason is. If fear of jail is the only thing keeping you from killing somebody you're one sick muther, friend!
Now, all that aside, to the OP, the simple answer to your question is "I don't know". I don't know your kid or his situation, what's troubling him or even whether he's got any significant problems or if you're just overly anxious. I can't tell from here which is more accurate an assessment. I can tell you you're asking the wrong people. You should be asking your own elders and most trusted advisors and those who know your son and who care about him. But mostly you should be asking him what's best to do to resolve this conflict.
There's a persistent notion in our society that there's a fix for everything and that every little problem, whether real or imagined, must be fixed. If it were a roomie or something acting like this, the answer would be simple, boot the bum out and forget about them. But this is your son. Even if he does move out, he'll still be your son. Even when he's 40 if he's in some trouble he'll still be your son and you'll still probably want to do whatever you can to help. Sometimes that means just listening and not getting involved.
When I was in my mid 20's my daughter reached the age where she discovered that she could rebel against me. And she had fun doing it too! She was still too young to understand that her pranks were causing the whole family problems so it was just fun for her to frustrate the hell out of me. I told my dad what was going on and asked him when this phase passes. He said "Oh, when they're around 35". That made me laugh, which actually did help. I know, far less serious issue than what you're describing. But even when my daughter got older and our issues became far, far more serious, that has always come back to me and helped put things in perspective. Things have a way of working themselves out. Remember that and try not to let fear make you do anything desperate or irreversible.