Guest guest Posted June 18, 1998 Report Share Posted June 18, 1998 Altho Lefever, director of the PROMIS rehab here in the UK considers the term of no value he did not make any effort to stop his counsellors using it when I was there. This is despite the fact that it was a sacking offence to refer patients to CODA or to attend it oneself (interesting constitutional issue there, i'd say). i knew that at least 2 of his counsellore were doing it unbenownst to him - and when i told him *one* was - he said he'd find out - presumably to sack them. i felt a bit of a heel but i reckoned that gave the both a 50% chance of escaping and besides, its not my job to keep PROMIS's secrets. They were both groupers anyway, tho i was myself at that time. anything that showed up what a heap of hypocrisy the whole place was could hardly be a bad thing. I was amazed to see the term " codependency " appear in a psychological paper that listed Lefever as a co-author. The term is used in such widely different ways it clearly has little value now. Incidence has been listed at 95%, 96% or even higher. this is not as silly a notion as it at first seems. 98% of westerners have tooth decay - that doesnt mean that tooth decay is a worthless concept. quite the reverse. One could say that it is merely the Neuroticism scale of trait theories of personality. 50% of ppl will score as more neurotic than average, and only abt 5% or less will report almost no neurotic symptoms at all. I did my final year BSc Psychology research project on Codependency - copies are available to anyone interested. i had previously concluded that the idea had some merit - but maybe it really is just old style Neuroticism. P. On Thu, 18 Jun 1998 14:41:35 -0700 -=d=- wrote: > Hazeltine itself issues a white paper to it's clinitians to stop using the > term " codependent " as it had no clinical foundation and was pop-psych and > too much treatment speak for even Hazeltine, who had made millions off of > their publishing arm. > > There is very, very little Graduate level substance abuse education in the > US (because there are no research schools in substance abuse) and virtually > no undergad- " counselor certificate " level education. Mostly it's Community > College stuff) University of Toronto's Addiction Research Studies Program is > one of the best (Graduate School) and I guess Rutgers is the best US school. > My advice is to continue through Graduate school and into a Doctoral program > in one of the above. I have been on the Credentialing Board (for substance > abuse counseling) in a large state in the US and I saw some pretty sorry > types that were " counselors " . Not ONE of them even comprehended alternatives > to 12-step groups. Very, very few knew even basic theraputic interactive > concepts. It was a very sorry state of affairs. If I can help you please > mail me directly. I received my doctorate in the U.S. and know a few people, > places, things, etc :-) > > Best of luck to you----study, study, study! > > Big help > > > >Since I made the decision to leave 12-step programs ( I had been > withdrawing > >slowly for about 5yrs) I have told know one except my husband, who still > goes > >to AA. He accepts my decision, however I do not for one second believe many > of > >my aquaintances in AA/NA would. Too much fear. " oh no your gonna drink and > use > >if you leave us " . I have always believed it was a decision to go out and > use, > >and if I needed an excuse, well I use any number of them. Anyway, it was > great > >when I found the ar12 ng, cuz I needed to know I was not crazy. > > > >I have been enrolled in college (returning after 20 yr). Human Services is > my > >major. > >I am currently working toward Alcohol/Drug Certificate, I have so far been > >fortunate in having a couple of instructors who do not by into the disease > >concept, and also disagrees with the diseasing of all the other human > >behavioral traits. However, one class " Codependency " out text books Melody > >Beattie's Codependent No More, yikes, so self serving and assuming I just > >about puked everytime I had to read that book. Another text had a test you > >could take to see if your codependent, and the instrutor pointed out that > >there was no way anyone could pass it, hence we are all codependent and we > >better get to a 12 step meeting. > > > >I do not think I will work in the Drug/Alcohol field, however I will remain > >working in the field of Human Services, and I am glad to know of the > >alternatives to the 12 steps, and will most likely hestitate before > suggesting > >AA/NA. > > > >I am currently working in a group home for teenage girls, and there is one > >17yr old in the program. It saddens me that she has been labeled as having > a > >life long disease, and will have to attend meetings for the rest of her > life, > >and if she does drink or use she will feel so much guilt and remorse, which > >might end up worse than if she was just allowed to be the normal teenager > that > >she is. I do not condone drinking and using, however I do believe as > Stanton > >Peele, that most teens grow out of it. I see that even with my old high > school > >friends. > > > >Anyway, what I am trying to say is the ng has been a big help to me, and I > >hope we don't allow a few jerks to spoil it. > > > >Sincerely > >Judie > > > > > >---- > >Read this list on the Web at http://www.FindMail.com/list/12-step-free/ > >To unsubscribe, email to 12-step-free-unsubscribe@... > >To subscribe, email to 12-step-free-subscribe@... > >-- > >Start a FREE E-Mail List at http://makelist.com ! > > > > > > ---- > Read this list on the Web at http://www.FindMail.com/list/12-step-free/ > To unsubscribe, email to 12-step-free-unsubscribe@... > To subscribe, email to 12-step-free-subscribe@... > -- > Start a FREE E-Mail List at http://makelist.com ! P. ---------------------- Pumpkin Eater " Facts are stubborn things " -- Judge Zobel, from Alain Rene Lesage [no, I didnt know who he was either] PERSONALITY-DISORDERS LIST: http://rdz.stjohns.edu/athenaeum/lists.phtml?personality-disorders _____________________ " At the Master's table, They gather for the Feast; They stab It with their steely knives But they just cant kill The Beast. " -- The Eagles ---- Read this list on the Web at http://www.FindMail.com/list/12-step-free/ To unsubscribe, email to 12-step-free-unsubscribe@... To subscribe, email to 12-step-free-subscribe@... -- Start a FREE E-Mail List at http://makelist.com ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 1999 Report Share Posted January 21, 1999 HOW DO I CANCEL THIS E-MAIL?....I DON'T HAVE THE TIME AND I RECEIVE TO MANY IN A DAY...PLEASE LET ME KNOW HOW TO CANCEL. THANKS, LAURI At 07:23 PM 1/21/99 +0000, you wrote: >Hello > >Yes, I know abt sickle-cell. I give that example myself sometimes to >demolish the " genetic addictive disease " concept. > >I also am not surprised abt Bettleheim's reports of concentration camp >dynamics either. Yes, I agree that some traits can be adaptive in some >environment, as you say. Indeed, by both biological and and social >evolutionary theory they pretty well have to be. > >It is appropriate to be anxious when confronted with threat, and to be >depressed when faced with a loss. nevertheless, anxiety disorders and >depressive disorders are accepted as genuine entities. > >I'm not saying youre objections arent valid, I'm just pointing out that >they can be applied to Abnormal Psychology in general; hence, you arent >really questioning my view as instead the whole of the field. Now, I'm >quite prepared to accept that such objections have value, I just merely >want to establish that they have *no specific* to codependence, and hence >there is no justification to dismiss it unless you dimiss *all* Abnormal >Psychology. > >The fact that the origins of Codependence theory are full of the > " proto-fascist " whatever do not justify dismissing all of it; I had hoped >my Piltdown Man example would explain why. Bettleheim serves as an example >here. He believed that autistic children suffered reactions like >concentration camp victims and blamed " refrigerator mothers " . Nowadays, >such psychogenic theories have almost disappeared in favour of those >suggesting some kinf of organic syndrome. Many parents, especially mothers, >and the children themselves may have suffered more as a result of >Bettleheim's fallacious theory. Neverthelss, Bettleheim correctly >identified the syndrome and provide an accurate *description* of the >phenomonon. The theory was wrong; but the description was right. > >The Codependence ppl are similar; their theories may be complete BS, but >the *description* of the syndrome accurate. > >You say I took your responsde personally; perhaps I did, but you actually >personalised somewhat the response itself. You have said " Pete thinks >there is something called codependence and something needs to be done abt >it. " Well, you yourself have accepted that there is likely to be >*something*, you just dont want the word " Codependence " used to denote it! >Secondly, I never said that " something had to be done abt it " I just said >it existed - you nevertheless perceived me as having a view solely on the >basis of your preconceptions. > >It is ironic that you portray Chaz as something of a 12-step and >reactionary apologist yet in reality I think his radical political >perspective is a *weakness* in his book. > >Ok, it might be very wonderful if we lived in a free, anarcho-syndicalist >Garden of Eden. But the reality is we dont. For ppl with addictive >problems, their obvious no.1 issue is to get themselves well again. >International Revolution will have to be left on hold. > >It is absurd for an individual or a self-help group to preoccupy themselves >with causes that ppl find difficult to fight when *well* let alone in the >throws of a compulsion. Hence, a little bit of good old-fashioned >conservative self-reliance values might do a power of good, at least >temporarily until they are back on their feet. > >when they're hale and hearty they can take on the industrio-military >complex. > >Pete > > > >> Pete - in thinking about the " codependency " concept, I wonder if you have >ever looked at Bruno Bettelheim's THE INFORMED HEART (1960)? The valuable >part of the book is Bettleheim's report on conditions in Dachau and >Buchenwald during 1938 and 1939. (In 1939, he came to the US, and taught >for many years at the U of Chicago. Bettelheim noted in the camps that 1) >rapid and major personality changes occurred under the conditions of >extreme stress, 2) many people who were " well adjusted " and " successful' >prior to imprisonment fell apart in the camps, and 3) people who were very >UNSUCCESSFUL on the outside often did very well in the camps. He also >describes many of the " specific psychological traits " that emerged amongst >prisoners. Now, I have never denied the reality of many of the > " attributes " that the codependency concept embraces. But that concept >comes to us as part of an all-embracing theory of " spiritual disease, " a >theory handed down thru AA, but with earlier roots in the fascist movement >of the 1930 > s. Are you familiar with the sickle-cell gene? Very > " unadaptive " in the US or England (in the homozygote, it causes sickle cell >anemia), this trait is very " adaptive " in West Africa, since the >heterozygote has a marked resistance to malaria. Isn't it possible that >what " codependency " theorists see as " disease " is, in reality, a set of >traits that are actually " adaptive " in certain types of environments? Not >in upper class suburbs, but perhaps in dangerous, unpredictable, >high-unemployment, racially-segregated, police-garrisoned ghetto. Just as >Bettelheim noted that " low lifes " might be able to survive better in a >concentration camp than could a former " successful " businessman or college >professor, perhaps " codependents " actually have BETTER coping skills to >survive under the growing conditions of anomie, competition, economic >stress and social fragmentation experienced by a good portion of the >American population. Problem is, the comfortable upper-income suburbs >write the books. Related materials for > your interests: L Pine, " Hashude: >An Experiment in Nazi 'asocial' Policy, " History Today, 1995, v 45, n 7 pp >37-44; S. Sontag, 1977, ILLNESS AS METAPHOR; H. Hanauske-Abel, " German >medicine and National Socialism in 1933, " British Medical Journal, 1996, v >313, n 7070, p 1453-1464, > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Isn't it Time You Moved to Fortune City? > >http://www2.fortunecity.com/cgi-bin/homepage/estate.pl?referer=findmail > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 1999 Report Share Posted January 21, 1999 Pete - It is now well known that in the former Soviet Union, political dissidents were routinely placed in mental hospitals, where they were " treated " with electric shock and powerful psychotropics. Such individuals were given diagnoses very similar to those currently employed in the United States under the rubric " personality disorders. " When criticized for their actions, psychiatrists in the former USSR pointed out (quite legitimately) that dissidents tended to be depressed, suspicious, untrusting, fearful, etc. Hence, the psychiatrists maintained, they were really " helping the dissidents " by dispensing electric shock treatments and thorazine, and by counseling these patients " to accept what they could not change. " According to the analysis you present, the Soviet psychiatrists were acting quite properly. Moreover, at least according to what I have read, most of the psychiatrists actually DID BELIEVE that they were acting in their patients' best interests. Like you, they thought that " fighting the system " was simply a futile activity, and certainly not one that individuals suffering from emotional depression, etc, should ever undertake. [Of course, throughout history, social dissent and psychological " instability " have often gone hand in hand, with the reason being that those who hold dissenting views end up paying a psychological price. Adolf Eichmann, on the other hand, was described by his psychiatrist at his trial in Israel as " extremely well adapted. " ] What I find troubling about your position, Pete, is not the conservative values inherent in it. On values we can simply agree to disagree. Rather, what I find disturbing is that most of the time you seem to believe that you are merely " doing science, " even though the embeddedness of values within your " science " is clearly expressed in the post to which I am responding. [For a value position quite different from your own expressed by psychologists, see E. Fromm, The Sane Society, or F. Fanon, Wretched of the Earth]. As to codependency, I do NOT accept the validity of this concept. Yes, codependency does point to some aspects of reality " out there, " but it mixes up real and important phenomena with mythical, " spiritual " hogwash. And the whole is put together into a theoretical structure which is truly ominous. Hence, the codependency concept is not valid. In a similar way, the German psychotherapeutic idea of " Jewish materialism " pointed to some realities. Jews were, indeed, present in the banking industry pre-1933 in numbers higher than their overall proportion in the population. I can accept this fact, without accepting the concept of 'Jewish materialism' as a spiritual disease, however. Same for 'codependency.' I accept some of the facts used to buttress the idea, but I reject the idea itself as invalid. (By the way, have you read G. Cocks, Psychotherapy in the Third Reich? German " family therapy " psychotherapists in the 1930s identified, quite correctly, that depression was a growing problem in Hitlerite Germany. They introduced many " short term " treatment interventions for depression that American psychotherapists have only recently rediscovered. But the German psychotherapists must be faulted for failing to take into account the larger picture, and for promoting adjustment to Nazi genocide. Or would you claim that even Nazi psychotherapists are justified in telling their patients to accept the status quo?) Myself, I believe both social and personal factors must always be considered in psychotherapy, just as both factors always enter into a lived life. Moreover, the values of the therapist always influence the kind of therapy he or she offers. On another issue - I recently re-read Sontag's ILLNESS AS METAPHOR; are you familiar with this brief, but excellent, piece of work? More generally, how familiar are you with the " medicalization " literature in sociology. If you are familiar with it, what are your grounds for not taking its arguments (and data) more seriously. Finally, just a nugget to support my position: Rush, M.D., signer of the American Declaration of Independence, is sometimes given credit for coining the term 'alcoholism.' He also viewed a number of other problems of his time in a medical light, and wrote out " disease descriptions " of them. For example, he identified a type of male laborer who simply could not accept responsibility, and who could not stick to his job. In this particular 'disease,' the afflicted party first began to feel restless and uncomfortable, and then suddenly made a dramatic geographic move, leaving behind his responsibilities and place of employment (this disease, Rush said, almost exclusively attacked males). Rush saw this " syndrome " as a biologically-caused personality defect, and speculated that it might be hereditary. He even gave it a suitably impressive Latin name. By the way, he also said that this " disease " was restricted to negros, with virtually all of those afflicted living in the American South. The defining symptom of the disease, Rush said, was that these Negros ran away from the plantations upon which they were slaves. ---------- > > To: 12-step-freeegroups > Subject: codependency > Date: Thursday, January 21, 1999 1:23 PM > > Hello > > Yes, I know abt sickle-cell. I give that example myself sometimes to > demolish the " genetic addictive disease " concept. > > I also am not surprised abt Bettleheim's reports of concentration camp > dynamics either. Yes, I agree that some traits can be adaptive in some > environment, as you say. Indeed, by both biological and and social > evolutionary theory they pretty well have to be. > > It is appropriate to be anxious when confronted with threat, and to be > depressed when faced with a loss. nevertheless, anxiety disorders and > depressive disorders are accepted as genuine entities. > > I'm not saying youre objections arent valid, I'm just pointing out that > they can be applied to Abnormal Psychology in general; hence, you arent > really questioning my view as instead the whole of the field. Now, I'm > quite prepared to accept that such objections have value, I just merely > want to establish that they have *no specific* to codependence, and hence > there is no justification to dismiss it unless you dimiss *all* Abnormal > Psychology. > > The fact that the origins of Codependence theory are full of the > " proto-fascist " whatever do not justify dismissing all of it; I had hoped > my Piltdown Man example would explain why. Bettleheim serves as an example > here. He believed that autistic children suffered reactions like > concentration camp victims and blamed " refrigerator mothers " . Nowadays, > such psychogenic theories have almost disappeared in favour of those > suggesting some kinf of organic syndrome. Many parents, especially mothers, > and the children themselves may have suffered more as a result of > Bettleheim's fallacious theory. Neverthelss, Bettleheim correctly > identified the syndrome and provide an accurate *description* of the > phenomonon. The theory was wrong; but the description was right. > > The Codependence ppl are similar; their theories may be complete BS, but > the *description* of the syndrome accurate. > > You say I took your responsde personally; perhaps I did, but you actually > personalised somewhat the response itself. You have said " Pete thinks > there is something called codependence and something needs to be done abt > it. " Well, you yourself have accepted that there is likely to be > *something*, you just dont want the word " Codependence " used to denote it! > Secondly, I never said that " something had to be done abt it " I just said > it existed - you nevertheless perceived me as having a view solely on the > basis of your preconceptions. > > It is ironic that you portray Chaz as something of a 12-step and > reactionary apologist yet in reality I think his radical political > perspective is a *weakness* in his book. > > Ok, it might be very wonderful if we lived in a free, anarcho-syndicalist > Garden of Eden. But the reality is we dont. For ppl with addictive > problems, their obvious no.1 issue is to get themselves well again. > International Revolution will have to be left on hold. > > It is absurd for an individual or a self-help group to preoccupy themselves > with causes that ppl find difficult to fight when *well* let alone in the > throws of a compulsion. Hence, a little bit of good old-fashioned > conservative self-reliance values might do a power of good, at least > temporarily until they are back on their feet. > > when they're hale and hearty they can take on the industrio-military > complex. > > Pete > > > > > Pete - in thinking about the " codependency " concept, I wonder if you have > ever looked at Bruno Bettelheim's THE INFORMED HEART (1960)? The valuable > part of the book is Bettleheim's report on conditions in Dachau and > Buchenwald during 1938 and 1939. (In 1939, he came to the US, and taught > for many years at the U of Chicago. Bettelheim noted in the camps that 1) > rapid and major personality changes occurred under the conditions of > extreme stress, 2) many people who were " well adjusted " and " successful' > prior to imprisonment fell apart in the camps, and 3) people who were very > UNSUCCESSFUL on the outside often did very well in the camps. He also > describes many of the " specific psychological traits " that emerged amongst > prisoners. Now, I have never denied the reality of many of the > " attributes " that the codependency concept embraces. But that concept > comes to us as part of an all-embracing theory of " spiritual disease, " a > theory handed down thru AA, but with earlier roots in the fascist movement > of the 1930 > s. Are you familiar with the sickle-cell gene? Very > " unadaptive " in the US or England (in the homozygote, it causes sickle cell > anemia), this trait is very " adaptive " in West Africa, since the > heterozygote has a marked resistance to malaria. Isn't it possible that > what " codependency " theorists see as " disease " is, in reality, a set of > traits that are actually " adaptive " in certain types of environments? Not > in upper class suburbs, but perhaps in dangerous, unpredictable, > high-unemployment, racially-segregated, police-garrisoned ghetto. Just as > Bettelheim noted that " low lifes " might be able to survive better in a > concentration camp than could a former " successful " businessman or college > professor, perhaps " codependents " actually have BETTER coping skills to > survive under the growing conditions of anomie, competition, economic > stress and social fragmentation experienced by a good portion of the > American population. Problem is, the comfortable upper-income suburbs > write the books. Related materials for > your interests: L Pine, " Hashude: > An Experiment in Nazi 'asocial' Policy, " History Today, 1995, v 45, n 7 pp > 37-44; S. Sontag, 1977, ILLNESS AS METAPHOR; H. Hanauske-Abel, " German > medicine and National Socialism in 1933, " British Medical Journal, 1996, v > 313, n 7070, p 1453-1464, > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Isn't it Time You Moved to Fortune City? > > http://www2.fortunecity.com/cgi-bin/homepage/estate.pl?referer=findmail > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.