Re: A Couple of Things to Say

[Guest guest]

Hi Mack nice to have some communication from someone with a lot in common in the Uk ! because I am a medical professional ( dentist ) I was able to be VERY assertive about not getting the right treatment . I had to do this in the knowledge that the docs etc would think that I was an aggressive old Bitch !!!, but its YOUR LIFE < and use that as a mantra .

My partner had a heart attack 4 years ago , and got wonderful treatment in a small modern STATE hospital in the South of Spain , he is a member of the Heart association or something and goes to cardiac rehab exercise twice a week . You shouldnt be getting angina again with a stent , theres trouble brewing .

[Guest guest]

> I was told by my doctors group ( doctors for gods sake ! ) when i

was not

> able to get treatment for my worsening diabetes for 3 months ( our

crap

> National Health Service...

I empathise. I'm currently trying to get my GP to take action on my

gradually worsening angina, following a Pcta/Stent. Apparently I have

to present with *exactly* the same sensations as preceded the actual

MI before any action will be taken. I'm reminded of the UK's " Wrong

kind of snow " phenomena(*) I truly hope my Doc in not in this secret

AA wing or I'm truly sunk ;-)

Mack

(*) For non-UK, The above is a reference to the collapse of our train

system due to arrival of 1 " of the " wrong kind of snow " one winter.

[Guest guest]

> I was told by my doctors group ( doctors for gods sake ! ) when i

was not

> able to get treatment for my worsening diabetes for 3 months ( our

crap

> National Health Service...

I empathise. I'm currently trying to get my GP to take action on my

gradually worsening angina, following a Pcta/Stent. Apparently I have

to present with *exactly* the same sensations as preceded the actual

MI before any action will be taken. I'm reminded of the UK's " Wrong

kind of snow " phenomena(*) I truly hope my Doc in not in this secret

AA wing or I'm truly sunk ;-)

Mack

(*) For non-UK, The above is a reference to the collapse of our train

system due to arrival of 1 " of the " wrong kind of snow " one winter.

[Guest guest]

> I was told by my doctors group ( doctors for gods sake ! ) when i

was not

> able to get treatment for my worsening diabetes for 3 months ( our

crap

> National Health Service...

I empathise. I'm currently trying to get my GP to take action on my

gradually worsening angina, following a Pcta/Stent. Apparently I have

to present with *exactly* the same sensations as preceded the actual

MI before any action will be taken. I'm reminded of the UK's " Wrong

kind of snow " phenomena(*) I truly hope my Doc in not in this secret

AA wing or I'm truly sunk ;-)

Mack

(*) For non-UK, The above is a reference to the collapse of our train

system due to arrival of 1 " of the " wrong kind of snow " one winter.

[Guest guest]

From Kayleigh, " I was told in treatment that alcoholics do not ever have any

other

mental problems. They're just alcoholics, and the steps will fix

that. Cancer and ingrown toenails were not discussed. "

<grin> The cancer and ingrown toenails were me being tongue in cheek.

That's a funny term my mother used to use. " Cures everything from cancer to

ingrown toenails. "

But yes, I, too, was always told that we were alcoholics, that's all, and if

we were having problems, we needed to work the steps harder. There was

tremendous pressure to *not* seek outside help for problems. " Them doctors

don't know nothin'. All you need is the Big Book. " So either we'd just not

mention that we'd sought outside help; or we'd mention we'd sought outside

help, and we'd get undermined and invalidated by our peers.

Cheers,

nz

[Guest guest]

From Kayleigh, " I was told in treatment that alcoholics do not ever have any

other

mental problems. They're just alcoholics, and the steps will fix

that. Cancer and ingrown toenails were not discussed. "

<grin> The cancer and ingrown toenails were me being tongue in cheek.

That's a funny term my mother used to use. " Cures everything from cancer to

ingrown toenails. "

But yes, I, too, was always told that we were alcoholics, that's all, and if

we were having problems, we needed to work the steps harder. There was

tremendous pressure to *not* seek outside help for problems. " Them doctors

don't know nothin'. All you need is the Big Book. " So either we'd just not

mention that we'd sought outside help; or we'd mention we'd sought outside

help, and we'd get undermined and invalidated by our peers.

Cheers,

nz

[Guest guest]

> You shouldnt be getting angina again with a stent , theres trouble

brewing .

>

Hi ,

Yep, thanks for those wise words. In fact I'm aware of most of the

implications and believe it still to be in the " look & see " stage,

but I will get *something* done and soon! As you no doubt know MI's

don't have to be associated with " pain " per se, indeed mine wasn't

and (still) isn't. I'd have quite happily carried on working through

it. I think I got used to a little non-specific " pain " as a drunk.

Good to hear your partner is doing so well! :-)

I do sometimes think it might be something that should be brought to

the attention of " alcoholics " . I knew *something* was wrong upto six

months before. Trouble was I was " recovering " and both Doc and I (was

willing) to put down these sensations to the post booze experience.

Further, I think some AAs (people?) exaggerate their health issues a

little to kind of " glamourise " their recovery and I also wonder if I

still have a little sensory deprivation, so don't feel too much! ;-)

My main point would be, irrespective of your drinking, if it doesn't

feel right and doesn't get better in a reasonable time it might not

be the (aftermath of) booze that is doing it. I don't blame AA's but

I am reminded e.g. not to take AAdvice on (any) *real* health issues.

I won't be manning any barracades on 12sf issues, but I do believe in

the positive (generally) role of health professionals e.g. in my own

case, so I put in a word regarding these issues sometimes... ;-)

Cheers,

Mack

[Guest guest]

> You shouldnt be getting angina again with a stent , theres trouble

brewing .

>

Hi ,

Yep, thanks for those wise words. In fact I'm aware of most of the

implications and believe it still to be in the " look & see " stage,

but I will get *something* done and soon! As you no doubt know MI's

don't have to be associated with " pain " per se, indeed mine wasn't

and (still) isn't. I'd have quite happily carried on working through

it. I think I got used to a little non-specific " pain " as a drunk.

Good to hear your partner is doing so well! :-)

I do sometimes think it might be something that should be brought to

the attention of " alcoholics " . I knew *something* was wrong upto six

months before. Trouble was I was " recovering " and both Doc and I (was

willing) to put down these sensations to the post booze experience.

Further, I think some AAs (people?) exaggerate their health issues a

little to kind of " glamourise " their recovery and I also wonder if I

still have a little sensory deprivation, so don't feel too much! ;-)

My main point would be, irrespective of your drinking, if it doesn't

feel right and doesn't get better in a reasonable time it might not

be the (aftermath of) booze that is doing it. I don't blame AA's but

I am reminded e.g. not to take AAdvice on (any) *real* health issues.

I won't be manning any barracades on 12sf issues, but I do believe in

the positive (generally) role of health professionals e.g. in my own

case, so I put in a word regarding these issues sometimes... ;-)

Cheers,

Mack

[Guest guest]

> Hi,

>

> I know there is a " PA, " Parents Anonymous. I have been tempted to

go

> and see what their spin on it is. I think they target parents who

> might have trouble with abuse issues, perhaps being abusive to their

> children. I'm not sure though and the very idea of this group

> frightens me, in light of the " success " of other of the Anonymous

> programs.

Hi --

I interned for a brief period with Parents Anonymous, back around

1990. They were not 12 step in any way. They provided support groups,

to be used in conjunction with (not instead of) therapy. The idea

behind that group, as it was explained to me, is that physically

abusive behavior can be successfully changed most of the time. Also,

children do better with their own family than they do with foster

care, so it's good to make a strong effort to keep the family together

when possible. They made a distinction between physical abuse and

sexual abuse; apparently it is difficult if not impossible to change

sexually abusive behavior.

Anyway, that's what I know about Parents Anonymous, although

admittedly my information is a bit out of date. I think they'd do well

to change the name of the group, so that they are not confused with 12

step programs.

judith

[Guest guest]

> Hi,

>

> I know there is a " PA, " Parents Anonymous. I have been tempted to

go

> and see what their spin on it is. I think they target parents who

> might have trouble with abuse issues, perhaps being abusive to their

> children. I'm not sure though and the very idea of this group

> frightens me, in light of the " success " of other of the Anonymous

> programs.

Hi --

I interned for a brief period with Parents Anonymous, back around

1990. They were not 12 step in any way. They provided support groups,

to be used in conjunction with (not instead of) therapy. The idea

behind that group, as it was explained to me, is that physically

abusive behavior can be successfully changed most of the time. Also,

children do better with their own family than they do with foster

care, so it's good to make a strong effort to keep the family together

when possible. They made a distinction between physical abuse and

sexual abuse; apparently it is difficult if not impossible to change

sexually abusive behavior.

Anyway, that's what I know about Parents Anonymous, although

admittedly my information is a bit out of date. I think they'd do well

to change the name of the group, so that they are not confused with 12

step programs.

judith

[Guest guest]

>

> > Hi,

> >

> > I know there is a " PA, " Parents Anonymous. I have been tempted to

> go

> > and see what their spin on it is. I think they target parents who

> > might have trouble with abuse issues, perhaps being abusive to

their

> > children. I'm not sure though and the very idea of this group

> > frightens me, in light of the " success " of other of the Anonymous

> > programs.

>

> Hi --

> I interned for a brief period with Parents Anonymous, back around

> 1990. They were not 12 step in any way. They provided support

groups,

> to be used in conjunction with (not instead of) therapy. The idea

> behind that group, as it was explained to me, is that physically

> abusive behavior can be successfully changed most of the time. Also,

> children do better with their own family than they do with foster

> care, so it's good to make a strong effort to keep the family

together

> when possible. They made a distinction between physical abuse and

> sexual abuse; apparently it is difficult if not impossible to change

> sexually abusive behavior.

>

> Anyway, that's what I know about Parents Anonymous, although

> admittedly my information is a bit out of date. I think they'd do

well

> to change the name of the group, so that they are not confused with

12

> step programs.

>

> judith

Hi Judith,

Thank you for letting me know this. I really did think they were

12-step. I've seen their posters in the doctor's office and the WIC

office, same places I've seen AA lit. Maybe more than that, it seems

like an issue that would be ripe for the AA approach...coupled with

the " anonymous " tag - yes, I think they should change their name as

well.

[Guest guest]

>

> > Hi,

> >

> > I know there is a " PA, " Parents Anonymous. I have been tempted to

> go

> > and see what their spin on it is. I think they target parents who

> > might have trouble with abuse issues, perhaps being abusive to

their

> > children. I'm not sure though and the very idea of this group

> > frightens me, in light of the " success " of other of the Anonymous

> > programs.

>

> Hi --

> I interned for a brief period with Parents Anonymous, back around

> 1990. They were not 12 step in any way. They provided support

groups,

> to be used in conjunction with (not instead of) therapy. The idea

> behind that group, as it was explained to me, is that physically

> abusive behavior can be successfully changed most of the time. Also,

> children do better with their own family than they do with foster

> care, so it's good to make a strong effort to keep the family

together

> when possible. They made a distinction between physical abuse and

> sexual abuse; apparently it is difficult if not impossible to change

> sexually abusive behavior.

>

> Anyway, that's what I know about Parents Anonymous, although

> admittedly my information is a bit out of date. I think they'd do

well

> to change the name of the group, so that they are not confused with

12

> step programs.

>

> judith

Hi Judith,

Thank you for letting me know this. I really did think they were

12-step. I've seen their posters in the doctor's office and the WIC

office, same places I've seen AA lit. Maybe more than that, it seems

like an issue that would be ripe for the AA approach...coupled with

the " anonymous " tag - yes, I think they should change their name as

well.

[Guest guest]

>

> > Hi,

> >

> > I know there is a " PA, " Parents Anonymous. I have been tempted to

> go

> > and see what their spin on it is. I think they target parents who

> > might have trouble with abuse issues, perhaps being abusive to

their

> > children. I'm not sure though and the very idea of this group

> > frightens me, in light of the " success " of other of the Anonymous

> > programs.

>

> Hi --

> I interned for a brief period with Parents Anonymous, back around

> 1990. They were not 12 step in any way. They provided support

groups,

> to be used in conjunction with (not instead of) therapy. The idea

> behind that group, as it was explained to me, is that physically

> abusive behavior can be successfully changed most of the time. Also,

> children do better with their own family than they do with foster

> care, so it's good to make a strong effort to keep the family

together

> when possible. They made a distinction between physical abuse and

> sexual abuse; apparently it is difficult if not impossible to change

> sexually abusive behavior.

>

> Anyway, that's what I know about Parents Anonymous, although

> admittedly my information is a bit out of date. I think they'd do

well

> to change the name of the group, so that they are not confused with

12

> step programs.

>

> judith

Hi Judith,

Thank you for letting me know this. I really did think they were

12-step. I've seen their posters in the doctor's office and the WIC

office, same places I've seen AA lit. Maybe more than that, it seems

like an issue that would be ripe for the AA approach...coupled with

the " anonymous " tag - yes, I think they should change their name as

well.

[Guest guest]

In all honesty, I did not really think I had cancer, since the

oncologist was so skeptical about it. I think my GP was just covering

his ass, as he should do, I guess.

But the weight loss is not unexplained, I did it on purpose. It's

just that our scale isn't working and I went too far. Actually it

took an old friend that I hadn't seen for about 12 years to partially

alert me that I'd lost a lot of weight, because I didn't feel as

though I had. Then they weighed me at the doctor's. Oops! But don't

worry, I can fix it.

> > I'm not sure why you say " What a relief! "

>

> Well, finding out that you don't have cancer... :-)

>

> Unexplained weight loss is a serious symptom many illnesses and I am

> glad you found out what was behind it, though I don't know anything

> about the diagnosis you have. Good luck!

>

>

[Guest guest]

In all honesty, I did not really think I had cancer, since the

oncologist was so skeptical about it. I think my GP was just covering

his ass, as he should do, I guess.

But the weight loss is not unexplained, I did it on purpose. It's

just that our scale isn't working and I went too far. Actually it

took an old friend that I hadn't seen for about 12 years to partially

alert me that I'd lost a lot of weight, because I didn't feel as

though I had. Then they weighed me at the doctor's. Oops! But don't

worry, I can fix it.

> > I'm not sure why you say " What a relief! "

>

> Well, finding out that you don't have cancer... :-)

>

> Unexplained weight loss is a serious symptom many illnesses and I am

> glad you found out what was behind it, though I don't know anything

> about the diagnosis you have. Good luck!

>

>

[Guest guest]

In all honesty, I did not really think I had cancer, since the

oncologist was so skeptical about it. I think my GP was just covering

his ass, as he should do, I guess.

But the weight loss is not unexplained, I did it on purpose. It's

just that our scale isn't working and I went too far. Actually it

took an old friend that I hadn't seen for about 12 years to partially

alert me that I'd lost a lot of weight, because I didn't feel as

though I had. Then they weighed me at the doctor's. Oops! But don't

worry, I can fix it.

> > I'm not sure why you say " What a relief! "

>

> Well, finding out that you don't have cancer... :-)

>

> Unexplained weight loss is a serious symptom many illnesses and I am

> glad you found out what was behind it, though I don't know anything

> about the diagnosis you have. Good luck!

>

>

[Guest guest]

The original AA did not propagate all these myths about post

withdrawal pain, and so forth. In fact there is one pamphlet that

explicity says, consult a doctor if you need to, AA is not medicine.

Treatment has really messed this up. I think one reason for it is

that a number of people (really lots of people) got hooked on benzos

prescribed by their doctors, and the doctors and patients really did

not know that anyone could get addicted to them. So in treatment,

these people were explicitly taught that it was not the doctor's

fault, it was theirs. (Huh? They were supposed to know it was

addictive when the doctors didn't?) I find that people are very

confused about the concepts of fault and responsibility.

The other thing they taught, however, was that we should totally trust

any doctor whom we told we were addicts, and follow whatever

prescription advice he gave. I fear this has resulted in some people

being given too much medication, and others receiving too little.

How bizarre. It wasn't only the alcoholism and addiction counselors

who said this, and I don't consider them professionals, I consider

them totally ignorant for the most part. There are some exceptions.

It was also, however, the nurses and doctors, who ought to have known

better, who told us this BS.

>

> > You shouldnt be getting angina again with a stent , theres trouble

> brewing .

> >

>

> Hi ,

>

> Yep, thanks for those wise words. In fact I'm aware of most of the

> implications and believe it still to be in the " look & see " stage,

> but I will get *something* done and soon! As you no doubt know MI's

> don't have to be associated with " pain " per se, indeed mine wasn't

> and (still) isn't. I'd have quite happily carried on working through

> it. I think I got used to a little non-specific " pain " as a drunk.

> Good to hear your partner is doing so well! :-)

>

> I do sometimes think it might be something that should be brought to

> the attention of " alcoholics " . I knew *something* was wrong upto six

> months before. Trouble was I was " recovering " and both Doc and I

(was

> willing) to put down these sensations to the post booze experience.

>

> Further, I think some AAs (people?) exaggerate their health issues a

> little to kind of " glamourise " their recovery and I also wonder if I

> still have a little sensory deprivation, so don't feel too much! ;-)

> My main point would be, irrespective of your drinking, if it doesn't

> feel right and doesn't get better in a reasonable time it might not

> be the (aftermath of) booze that is doing it. I don't blame AA's but

> I am reminded e.g. not to take AAdvice on (any) *real* health

issues.

>

> I won't be manning any barracades on 12sf issues, but I do believe

in

> the positive (generally) role of health professionals e.g. in my own

> case, so I put in a word regarding these issues sometimes... ;-)

>

> Cheers,

>

> Mack

[Guest guest]

The original AA did not propagate all these myths about post

withdrawal pain, and so forth. In fact there is one pamphlet that

explicity says, consult a doctor if you need to, AA is not medicine.

Treatment has really messed this up. I think one reason for it is

that a number of people (really lots of people) got hooked on benzos

prescribed by their doctors, and the doctors and patients really did

not know that anyone could get addicted to them. So in treatment,

these people were explicitly taught that it was not the doctor's

fault, it was theirs. (Huh? They were supposed to know it was

addictive when the doctors didn't?) I find that people are very

confused about the concepts of fault and responsibility.

The other thing they taught, however, was that we should totally trust

any doctor whom we told we were addicts, and follow whatever

prescription advice he gave. I fear this has resulted in some people

being given too much medication, and others receiving too little.

How bizarre. It wasn't only the alcoholism and addiction counselors

who said this, and I don't consider them professionals, I consider

them totally ignorant for the most part. There are some exceptions.

It was also, however, the nurses and doctors, who ought to have known

better, who told us this BS.

>

> > You shouldnt be getting angina again with a stent , theres trouble

> brewing .

> >

>

> Hi ,

>

> Yep, thanks for those wise words. In fact I'm aware of most of the

> implications and believe it still to be in the " look & see " stage,

> but I will get *something* done and soon! As you no doubt know MI's

> don't have to be associated with " pain " per se, indeed mine wasn't

> and (still) isn't. I'd have quite happily carried on working through

> it. I think I got used to a little non-specific " pain " as a drunk.

> Good to hear your partner is doing so well! :-)

>

> I do sometimes think it might be something that should be brought to

> the attention of " alcoholics " . I knew *something* was wrong upto six

> months before. Trouble was I was " recovering " and both Doc and I

(was

> willing) to put down these sensations to the post booze experience.

>

> Further, I think some AAs (people?) exaggerate their health issues a

> little to kind of " glamourise " their recovery and I also wonder if I

> still have a little sensory deprivation, so don't feel too much! ;-)

> My main point would be, irrespective of your drinking, if it doesn't

> feel right and doesn't get better in a reasonable time it might not

> be the (aftermath of) booze that is doing it. I don't blame AA's but

> I am reminded e.g. not to take AAdvice on (any) *real* health

issues.

>

> I won't be manning any barracades on 12sf issues, but I do believe

in

> the positive (generally) role of health professionals e.g. in my own

> case, so I put in a word regarding these issues sometimes... ;-)

>

> Cheers,

>

> Mack

[Guest guest]

The original AA did not propagate all these myths about post

withdrawal pain, and so forth. In fact there is one pamphlet that

explicity says, consult a doctor if you need to, AA is not medicine.

Treatment has really messed this up. I think one reason for it is

that a number of people (really lots of people) got hooked on benzos

prescribed by their doctors, and the doctors and patients really did

not know that anyone could get addicted to them. So in treatment,

these people were explicitly taught that it was not the doctor's

fault, it was theirs. (Huh? They were supposed to know it was

addictive when the doctors didn't?) I find that people are very

confused about the concepts of fault and responsibility.

The other thing they taught, however, was that we should totally trust

any doctor whom we told we were addicts, and follow whatever

prescription advice he gave. I fear this has resulted in some people

being given too much medication, and others receiving too little.

How bizarre. It wasn't only the alcoholism and addiction counselors

who said this, and I don't consider them professionals, I consider

them totally ignorant for the most part. There are some exceptions.

It was also, however, the nurses and doctors, who ought to have known

better, who told us this BS.

>

> > You shouldnt be getting angina again with a stent , theres trouble

> brewing .

> >

>

> Hi ,

>

> Yep, thanks for those wise words. In fact I'm aware of most of the

> implications and believe it still to be in the " look & see " stage,

> but I will get *something* done and soon! As you no doubt know MI's

> don't have to be associated with " pain " per se, indeed mine wasn't

> and (still) isn't. I'd have quite happily carried on working through

> it. I think I got used to a little non-specific " pain " as a drunk.

> Good to hear your partner is doing so well! :-)

>

> I do sometimes think it might be something that should be brought to

> the attention of " alcoholics " . I knew *something* was wrong upto six

> months before. Trouble was I was " recovering " and both Doc and I

(was

> willing) to put down these sensations to the post booze experience.

>

> Further, I think some AAs (people?) exaggerate their health issues a

> little to kind of " glamourise " their recovery and I also wonder if I

> still have a little sensory deprivation, so don't feel too much! ;-)

> My main point would be, irrespective of your drinking, if it doesn't

> feel right and doesn't get better in a reasonable time it might not

> be the (aftermath of) booze that is doing it. I don't blame AA's but

> I am reminded e.g. not to take AAdvice on (any) *real* health

issues.

>

> I won't be manning any barracades on 12sf issues, but I do believe

in

> the positive (generally) role of health professionals e.g. in my own

> case, so I put in a word regarding these issues sometimes... ;-)

>

> Cheers,

>

> Mack

[Guest guest]

> In all honesty, I did not really think I had cancer, since the

> oncologist was so skeptical about it. I think my GP was just

covering

> his ass, as he should do, I guess.

>

> But the weight loss is not unexplained, I did it on purpose. It's

> just that our scale isn't working and I went too far. Actually it

> took an old friend that I hadn't seen for about 12 years to

partially

> alert me that I'd lost a lot of weight, because I didn't feel as

> though I had. Then they weighed me at the doctor's. Oops! But

don't

> worry, I can fix it.

Sorry, I misunderstood completely. I thought the weight loss was

related to the diagnosis you got. :-/ I'll read more carefully the

next time.

[Guest guest]

> In all honesty, I did not really think I had cancer, since the

> oncologist was so skeptical about it. I think my GP was just

covering

> his ass, as he should do, I guess.

>

> But the weight loss is not unexplained, I did it on purpose. It's

> just that our scale isn't working and I went too far. Actually it

> took an old friend that I hadn't seen for about 12 years to

partially

> alert me that I'd lost a lot of weight, because I didn't feel as

> though I had. Then they weighed me at the doctor's. Oops! But

don't

> worry, I can fix it.

Sorry, I misunderstood completely. I thought the weight loss was

related to the diagnosis you got. :-/ I'll read more carefully the

next time.

[Guest guest]

> In all honesty, I did not really think I had cancer, since the

> oncologist was so skeptical about it. I think my GP was just

covering

> his ass, as he should do, I guess.

>

> But the weight loss is not unexplained, I did it on purpose. It's

> just that our scale isn't working and I went too far. Actually it

> took an old friend that I hadn't seen for about 12 years to

partially

> alert me that I'd lost a lot of weight, because I didn't feel as

> though I had. Then they weighed me at the doctor's. Oops! But

don't

> worry, I can fix it.

Sorry, I misunderstood completely. I thought the weight loss was

related to the diagnosis you got. :-/ I'll read more carefully the

next time.

[Guest guest]

> The original AA did not propagate all these myths about post

> withdrawal pain, and so forth. In fact there is one pamphlet that

> explicity says, consult a doctor if you need to, AA is not

medicine.

> Treatment has really messed this up.

I think I'm loosing this thread (sic) a bit? My apologies if this is

not all relevant, but just a few thoughts anyway! :-) I believe there

is an, albeit unintentional, lack of *consistency* in the treatment

and understanding of addiction within the UK health profession.

The only other people with " alcoholic " experience are of course AA.

I found their accounts of early recovery to be often coloured by

what they felt *should* have happened in the post withdrawl period.

Does it (invariably) " Get Better " , if one grins and bears it? I admit

to at least *hoping* at the time that it might. There is often too

the contageous belief that only an " alcoholic " can feel what it's

like to be " alcoholic " and (at the time) I may have been able to

convince myself AND health professionals that was the case! ;-)

But, I get the impression that AA is *assumed* to be a " Good Thing "

over here by the professionals, based on NO real evidence and it's

true nature and purpose are moreover largely unexplored. Anyone e.g.

admitting to a doctor or employer that they have a problem with

alcohol BUT is member of AA is perhaps *assumed* to have the matter

pretty much under control and is advantageously " one less to treat " .

The term " alcoholic " is very badly understood (despite AA's efforts?)

among many professionals. There is no implicit " recovering " and it is

taken to mean *active* drunk - with very negative connotations.

From an employment point of view, a lot of companies do not seem to

have any firm drug or alcohol policy. One now sees more of the stated

policy in e.g. recruitment advertising, but I sense that the choice

for many people with unresolved drink issues is either to " volunteer "

for AA (rehab) or to be retired - usually " on health grounds " . A form

of coercion, albeit a shade more subtle than I see from the USA.

Mack

[Guest guest]

> The original AA did not propagate all these myths about post

> withdrawal pain, and so forth. In fact there is one pamphlet that

> explicity says, consult a doctor if you need to, AA is not

medicine.

> Treatment has really messed this up.

I think I'm loosing this thread (sic) a bit? My apologies if this is

not all relevant, but just a few thoughts anyway! :-) I believe there

is an, albeit unintentional, lack of *consistency* in the treatment

and understanding of addiction within the UK health profession.

The only other people with " alcoholic " experience are of course AA.

I found their accounts of early recovery to be often coloured by

what they felt *should* have happened in the post withdrawl period.

Does it (invariably) " Get Better " , if one grins and bears it? I admit

to at least *hoping* at the time that it might. There is often too

the contageous belief that only an " alcoholic " can feel what it's

like to be " alcoholic " and (at the time) I may have been able to

convince myself AND health professionals that was the case! ;-)

But, I get the impression that AA is *assumed* to be a " Good Thing "

over here by the professionals, based on NO real evidence and it's

true nature and purpose are moreover largely unexplored. Anyone e.g.

admitting to a doctor or employer that they have a problem with

alcohol BUT is member of AA is perhaps *assumed* to have the matter

pretty much under control and is advantageously " one less to treat " .

The term " alcoholic " is very badly understood (despite AA's efforts?)

among many professionals. There is no implicit " recovering " and it is

taken to mean *active* drunk - with very negative connotations.

From an employment point of view, a lot of companies do not seem to

have any firm drug or alcohol policy. One now sees more of the stated

policy in e.g. recruitment advertising, but I sense that the choice

for many people with unresolved drink issues is either to " volunteer "

for AA (rehab) or to be retired - usually " on health grounds " . A form

of coercion, albeit a shade more subtle than I see from the USA.

Mack

[Guest guest]

> The original AA did not propagate all these myths about post

> withdrawal pain, and so forth. In fact there is one pamphlet that

> explicity says, consult a doctor if you need to, AA is not

medicine.

> Treatment has really messed this up.

I think I'm loosing this thread (sic) a bit? My apologies if this is

not all relevant, but just a few thoughts anyway! :-) I believe there

is an, albeit unintentional, lack of *consistency* in the treatment

and understanding of addiction within the UK health profession.

The only other people with " alcoholic " experience are of course AA.

I found their accounts of early recovery to be often coloured by

what they felt *should* have happened in the post withdrawl period.

Does it (invariably) " Get Better " , if one grins and bears it? I admit

to at least *hoping* at the time that it might. There is often too

the contageous belief that only an " alcoholic " can feel what it's

like to be " alcoholic " and (at the time) I may have been able to

convince myself AND health professionals that was the case! ;-)

But, I get the impression that AA is *assumed* to be a " Good Thing "

over here by the professionals, based on NO real evidence and it's

true nature and purpose are moreover largely unexplored. Anyone e.g.

admitting to a doctor or employer that they have a problem with

alcohol BUT is member of AA is perhaps *assumed* to have the matter

pretty much under control and is advantageously " one less to treat " .

The term " alcoholic " is very badly understood (despite AA's efforts?)

among many professionals. There is no implicit " recovering " and it is

taken to mean *active* drunk - with very negative connotations.

From an employment point of view, a lot of companies do not seem to

have any firm drug or alcohol policy. One now sees more of the stated

policy in e.g. recruitment advertising, but I sense that the choice

for many people with unresolved drink issues is either to " volunteer "

for AA (rehab) or to be retired - usually " on health grounds " . A form

of coercion, albeit a shade more subtle than I see from the USA.

Mack