What is a ‘functioning’ alcoholic? And,why would the condition of alcoholism need to be qualified?. It seems to me that the word alcoholic is explanatory enough without another word in front of it. no? Is a ‘functioning’ alcoholic just kidding himself, or is it an inabler (Sp?) using that term?
A functioning alcoholic is a person who function in his job whilst under the influence of alcohol. The difference between that and an alcoholic is that an alcoholic probably isn’t fully drunk at work or doesn’t work or ‘work’ is irrelevant in the definition as an alcoholic.
There are alcoholics who’s lives are “out of control”. Everything is wrong. They can’t hold a job, are in debt, have difficulty in relationships and basically they will do damaging things to themselves and others because of, and for the sake of, alcohol.
There are “functioning alcoholics” who continue to hold a job, have a family life and otherwise appear to functioning like a “normal” person. However, their lives are still ruled by alcohol. They can be just as dependent and miserable as a “non-functioning” alcoholic but it is only in appearance. Some would say it’s a matter of degree and a funtioning alcoholic is most likely on the path to becoming a nonfuntioning alcholic if they don’t bring their dependence under control.
A more precise definition is one who drinks alcoholically, yet manages to stay economically productive (in the broadest sense of holding down a job or living off an inheritence) and take care of the basic acts of daily living. So despite negative consequences from their drinking (health problems, family issues, legal troubles, etc.), they manage to both continue to drink to excess and stay off of skid row.
And this is often because either they are the boss, or have a boss who isn’t paying attention, or is covering up because of being another alcoholic.
I really question how long an alcoholic can function without a lot of enablers at this or her place of employment. I know I had plenty of them in my time as an employed alcoholic.
Well, I did it for a long time- about 5 years at the same job.
Fully alcoholic, fully functioning. Otherwise, how would I be able to afford to drink?
No enabling needed, because I was still able to perform my job functions, and my arrest didn’t interfere with my work. It can be difficult to tell if a daily drinker is hung over (or still drunk) at work. We are very good actors- we have to be.
When you are a dedicated drunk or junkie, you have to support your various habits. That means either hold down a good job or do crime, and I was never much of a criminal.
And I was most definitely not the boss.
Your answer depends greatly on your definition of alcoholic. The best explanation of alcoholism I ever heard was a person who gets a beyond normal enjoyment from drinking, and can’t control thier want for more of the drink. So you could drink once a month and be an alcoholic. However, there are other people who can have a drink every night, control themselves, stop when they’ve reached a limit, and not be alcoholics.
I like this definition, because I believe that alcoholism isn’t something that goes away. If you’re an alcoholic, you are an alcoholic you’re entire life, even if you don’t drink. I like this definition. I come from a long line of self described alcoholics. Parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles. But, they are all functioning members of society, all have worked hard to good jobs, own thier own homes, raise thier families and care for each other.
My point being though, if you prescribe to the above definiton, it’s easy to see how someone can be an alcoholic, and be functioning.
Really depends on how you define alcoholic. If you define alcoholic as someone who misses work or can’t perform competently because of last night’s drinking, then of course there have to be enablers at work. But that would mean my father, who drank at least a six pack every day , who wouldn’t give up that drinking no matter how broke we were, and who would regularly fly into drunken rages over the most trivial things wasn’t an alcoholic , simply because he was able to get up every morning and go to work and perform his low-skilled job competently. He did that until he had a stroke and was no longer able to work. He continued drinking until he had another one that left him unable to walk around the corner to buy beer. To this day, he looks forward to any event at which he might be able to get a drink, and will finish other people’s drinks if they are left unattended.He absolutely is an alcoholic, and the fact that he was able to to avoid one particular consequence of drinking doesn’t exclude him when he wasn’t able to avoid the others.
There is in some posts the old, “I can drive better half drunk that most people can sober” myth. I will require a lot of convincing that anyone whose main goal is the next drink is a well performing employee.
In addition to being actors, alcoholics are also adept at fooling themselves into thinking that they are doing the job, when really they are being half carried by others.
I was the only person who did my job and I always had excellent performance reviews.
Don’t know if you’re talking about my post or not, but I have to say you seem to be overlooking a lot of jobs. It may be that people with jobs that require some thought and judgement can’t perform competently when their main goal is the next drink. Doesn’t mean that someone whose job consists of sweeping and mopping floors , or sticking plants in a pot , or giving out lanes in a bowling alley can’t perform when their main goal is the next drink.
This has been educational. I’d always thought that a “functional alcoholic” was someone whose psycho-physiological reliance upon alcohol was so great that they needed to have some level of alcohol constantly in their system in order to get through their day. I have an uncle like this; upon waking, he engages in his morning ablutions then he has to have a shot of whiskey before he can even make coffee. He usually adds another shot to his first cup of coffee, then he’ll have a large and strong mixed drink – gin and tonic being the norm – at lunch (made easier by virtue of his job: owner of a bar) and several more shots or vodka on the rocks or a bottle (or two) of wine throughout the evening.
He manages quite well, his bar is well run, makes a tidy profit, his employees, patrons and vendors love him, his finances are in order, his wife tolerates him well (and they treat each other with warmth and kindness after 50 years of marriage, even if there’s no great passion left) and his children visit regularly without any sense that they do so only from some notion of filial obligation.
But without that alcohol always coursing through his bloodstream, he can’t manage. He gets tremors and will break out into a cold sweat, and I presume that it gets worse from there, though I haven’t (fortunately) been witness to him under such conditions. I did see him on the day we buried my aunt (his sister) when circumstances prevented him from having his morning and lunchtime drinks, and he was a mess. He could barely walk because he was shaking so badly. A nephew somehow procured a flask of something, (someone must’ve had it stashed somewhere because it was a Sunday afternoon and the only store selling booze in that small town was closed) and apparently my uncle downed the whole thing in the car en route from the funeral service to the cemetary, because he was a whole new man before the coffin was in the ground.
He’s 74 years old so the family has essentially given up on the idea that he will ever get sober but he’s in otherwise good health for his age, doesn’t drive himself and doesn’t seem to have problems related to his drinking in and of itself, so we tolerate it.
I always thought this his necessity was what made him “functional” but it’s good to know that it’s actually his capability of functioning alone that does it.
It seems to me that all jobs are important or no one would pay to have them done. It is just as possible to be a bad janitor as it is to be a bad brain surgeon.
My father is an alcoholic. Going on 12 years sober. He was HIGHLY functional - he managed a high-end hotel for many years, having worked his way up to that level from being a bartender years before (he now manages a very private golf club). The difference from what people are describing in this thread, though, is that he wasn’t constantly drunk or hungover. He didn’t even drink every day. But when he DID drink - he drank way too much. He never drove drunk, he never put us or my mom at risk, but his behaviour when he had access to alcohol was out of control. That, for him, was alcoholism, and it took a very painful argument with my mom to get him to clue in and quit drinking.
No one was enabling him at work. Sure, he had his drinking buddies, some which were alcoholics themselves, some who weren’t, but he got where he was by his own merits at work, and was - and is - very well respected in the industry. He still receives several job offers to be hired away to other places every year, which was something that also happened back when he was drinking.
Being an alcoholic doesn’t mean ALL aspects of your life are out-of-control.
We are getting into a semantic bind here, and I could easily try to make my point true by definition. I had a boss who was like your father. When he drank he quite often drank too much. However, he started out as a Junior Professional, working for me, and ended up as the top civilian at a large and valuable Navy design, development and test organization. We used to take trips to Washington at which there was some drinking. In fact there was quite a lot of it. On one of the trips he told me and another co-worker that drinking on these trips was just too hard because of the effect on the next day’s work and he wasn’t going to join us at the bar anymore. And he didn’t. Although when he drank he often drank too much, he wasn’t and isn’t and alcoholic.
I think an alcoholic is anyone who has allowed alcohol to become one of the most important things in his or her life, if not the most important. Most recovering alcoholics that I know accept the definition of an alcoholic as someone who allows alcohol to adversly affect their life in their family, job or other social relationships. In that case “functioning alcoholic” meaning someone who performs well all on their own despite being alcoholic is an oxymoron. But that’s just me.
It would be an oxymoron if it were used to mean someone who performs well in all aspects despite their drinking. If there are no bad consequences to your drinking, perhaps you’re not an alcoholic, even if you drink every day. However, it’s normally used to mean a person who has avoided one particular consequence- loss of employment. A “functioning alcoholic” is one who has been able to remain employed- but it doesn’t mean that that person hasn’t allowed alcohol to affect their family life, other social relationships or their health. We wouldn’t exclude someone from the definition of alcoholic if they couldn’t hold a job, but avoided an adverse affect on their family life.
Me too.
David, it can be an easy out to think that all alcoholics are idiots, or that they aren’t capable of rational thought or professional responsibility and behavior when they are drinking, but it’s just not true.
I don’t know if that’s what you are saying, but it seemed that way upon first read.
I was a quality assurance rep for the largest company of it’s kind in the world, and had a great deal of responsibility. People could lose professional licenses as result of my investigations. I never had a problem performing my job, unless you count being an ogre first thing in the morning, which happened sometimes.
Being a practicing alcoholic didn’t mean being a fuckup in all aspects of my life. There were a number of people in different sectors of my life who had no idea I was an alcoholic, and I was a daily drinker.
But YMMV, as always.
[QUOTE=EJsGirl]
Me too.
David, it can be an easy out to think that all alcoholics are idiots, or that they aren’t capable of rational thought or professional responsibility and behavior when they are drinking, but it’s just not true.
QUOTE]
If that’s what you read in my posts I must be an awfully poor writer.
I guess, since there isn’t much agreement here on what is or is not an alcoholic we might as well agree to just stop.
Two very subjective terms you have here. It appears that the OP has been answered somewhat though. As far as the spectrum of alcoholism goes, there is no correct answer. Only that one must admit this to themselves before any help can occur. They/we are ultimately powerless over alcohol.
Functional in the sense that they/we are by appearances, in control of it (alcohol). Our lives are somewhat manageable (some more so than others) yet WE know or feel that it is simply a matter of time AND are in most cases correct.
Most functional alcoholics are past drinking simply for fun or pleasure and now drink of necessity. (Not fun anymore) Often a functional alcoholic can stop for long periods of time. Many don’t drink everyday…but when they do. Oftentimes if not every time it is to excess. Woe be the functioning drunk, he is often the “fool” who says he can stop anytime he wants. (Fool as in fooling himself)
Some of the best jesters I’ve ever known were very intelligent people. Many of them esp. doctors, lawyers and judges seem to be at high risk for this particular type of foolishness. Type A personalities, successful career, affluent, respected, well educated, much EGO… very tough combination when the alcoholic is extremely intelligent AND highly functional. Usually a very hard bottom drunk.
Anyway, didn’t mean to preach. 
Good luck, one day at a time.
just another friend of Bill’s