I’m trying to wrap my head around that, and I think I see Sam’s point.
The only way I could see it being “no longer [one’s own] decision” is if somehow one’s body were overtaken and one’s muscles began moving uncontrollably, pouring drinks and gulping them down.
I can understand a strong urge. But saying that the alcoholic is powerless, that just sounds like a cop out. My apologies, but it does.
People make decisions to fight urges all the time. Even very powerful urges like sexual drive, hunger, and thirst. Maybe this is up there with extreme thirst, or an adrenaline-fueled impulse to save one’s children from harm – I can’t say, I haven’t been there – but I kinda doubt it.
When a person feels his life is immediately threatened and his bowels loosen up, that’s uncontrollable. When faced with the death of a family member, a person begins weeping, that’s uncontrollable. Ordering another round or buying another six pack… nah.
Several of my addict friends, who were aware they were addicted, described the impulse a different way: Somewhere in the back of your mind, you know that what you are doing is destructive, but you don’t care. Getting the fix, whether it is alcohol, pot, heroin, tobacco, even FOOD, is what is important right now. I see an element of clinical depression that seems to underly the addiction–meaning the inability to see a compelling reason to stop the activity that you know is destructive. In short, the addict is unable to see far enough into the future to see a realizable good end. The addict weighs: junk now, or better life … uh, later, maybe. Maybe after this last fix. Other addicts don’t even recognize a problem–they’re just partyin’ like there ain’t no tomorrow. Why the hell should they stop?
I agree that “powerless” is not the right adjective, unless it is followed up by the clause, “to care enough to stop.” I’m not saying that the addict necessarily *likes *their condition, in fact mis-recognizing the addiction as “weakness” often enough compounds the ambivalence toward stopping. “I’m weak, I suck, screw it, I’m cooking up.”
Yes! I also agree that the criteria cited for the DSM definition is a little misleading. “Social problems” is very loosely defined. I agree that it depends on how the person (family member) answers the question, THEIR individual beliefs about alcohol and alcohol abuse. Also, it seems to me that family history (family history of abuse, that is) might be included somewhere, though I’ve no suggestion as to where or how it would be classified… especially since it would be hard to reference family history and there’s no real scientific way of determining whether or not dead grandparents, etc. were even alcoholics. But anyway…
Here’s a quote I found:
‘Alcoholics are those excessive drinkers whose dependence on alcohol has attained such a degree that it shows notable disturbance or an interference with their bodily and mental health, their personal relationships and smooth economic functioning or who show prodromal signs of such a development. They therefore need treatment.’
I think that getting totally drunk a couple times a year doesn’t make an alcoholic. I would define that as “binge drinking.” And I believe it can cause just as many problems as alcoholism (though it’s probably less likely to cause problems).
I consider myself a behavioral alcoholic. Sometimes I’ll just have a beer or two, other times I’ll have eight. I see it as a choice that I make, but I often choose poorly and feel like shit the next day.