Beyond Addiction by William C. Moyers

Improving our understanding of alcohol and drug addiction

Back at Me

My most memorable moment with a boomerang as a kid was tossing it in defiance of the large plate-glass window across the street from where I was standing. Mine clearly was not designed for sport; those, if thrown properly, return to the thrower, at least in theory. No, mine flew as the boomerang was originally intended -- straight and true to kill small animals for food in the Australian outback -- right through the defenseless neighbor's window. All I got in return was the expensive consequence of replacing the glass. I'm not sure what happened to my boomerang.

I'm feeling a bit like that right now. Two weeks ago in this space, I solicited your input for an "insider's" guide I'm putting together about addiction, treatment and recovery. So far, I've gotten back what I hoped for -- invaluable, unique perspectives that should help. But my deliberate pitch seems to have unintentionally shattered my relationship with some of you. Ouch. These sharp, jagged edges cut deep.

"I am offended that you would suggest that a drunken driver has an 'illness' that has anything to do with genetics or anything except what a drunken driver is -- a willfully irresponsible, selfish person who knows the risks when he gets behind the wheel. My sister and her friend were killed by a drunken driver 20 years ago. The years have done nothing to ease my family's pain, made worse because the killer did her time in jail and is out free now, while we will always suffer without my sister. Drunken drivers have a problem. But it is their fault. They aren't sick with any illness." That's from Mary M. in Vero Beach, Fla.

On relapse, here is Glenn B.'s perspective from Providence, R.I.:

"When somebody starts drinking again (especially after consequence), it means he has no willpower. If a drunk can't stay 'undrunk,' he deserves no quarter, no sympathy, no second chance from us.

I stopped drinking too much a long time ago. They even diagnosed me as 'alcoholic' (a drunk) and told me I never could drink again. Today I can drink casually, but I make sure to never drink too much. I have the willpower to moderate or stop on my own, and that's all it comes down to really."

On treatment for addiction, here's what Tom S. in Kenosha, Wis., thinks:

"I like what you write, but I won't read any book from you or anyone else who advocates for treatment, because though I do believe that alcoholism is an illness, I don't believe that alcoholics require treatment to get well. Treatment is that 'easier, softer way' that fools way too many of us to pay way too much money for what we can find for free in Alcoholics Anonymous. That is the solution. Don't forget that before there was Hazelden, there was AA. And after Hazelden is gone, AA will still be around."

On sharing with the next generation our own experiences with alcohol or other drugs, Constance D. from Tucson, Ariz., thinks that is a bad idea:

"Not in a million years will I tell my grandkids that I was a drug addict. I'm a child of the '60s. The times were different. We were young. Back then, nobody knew the dangers of drugs. Why would I tell them that their Mimi was smoking dope and dropping LSD? I love them. I spoil them. They love it. That's how they see me now. To open the sealed box of my past only invites them to think, 'Well, our Mimi was using drugs back then and she's OK now, so it must be OK.' That's not the message I or any of us old-timers want to send to youngsters."

There I have it -- other sharp perspectives I didn't quite expect when I tossed the solicitation your way. This book's going to be interesting.

January 21, 2012