|
U-Know! Forum » No treatment for you, fatty... |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Rolling Ronnie 1468 posts |
Dec 07, 2005, 15:39
|
||
Addiction cannot be taken in isolation. Willpower is a huge determining factor as well. Addicts, like non-addicts, can have enormous willpower and if they choose to turn their lives around they often can. Those whose willpower is weak are pretty well doomed.
|
|||
|
Kid Calamity 9048 posts |
Dec 07, 2005, 18:56
|
||
|
"As ToneStone and OghamSunFace were the same person, as was Lemon/Manao/Hongman/Kalamasi," I don't think Hongnam was Lemon. Hongnam was putting up a good sensible argument when he got banned. He seemed a lot more eloquent than I recall Lemon being.
|
|||
Merrick 2148 posts |
Dec 07, 2005, 19:25
|
||
|
Nat, first let me say that I'm genuinely sorry you've had to deal with a fucked up addict at close quarters, and in no way do I wish to belittle the damage done to him or you and others around him. "he said to me - 'don't worry as that won't happen to me as I'm not an alcoholic'... he won't take help despite the fact he's spent most of the summer in hospital through alcohol... working with alcoholics like I do, I know full well he's not the only one who thinks like this!" Then you'll know that, as Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous will tell you, the first thing to conquer in an addict is their denial. Denying it to themselves and others doesn't necessarily mean they don't have a part of them that knows there's a problem. Addicts who beat addiction will commonly tell of how they fucked up the lives of everyone close to them and denied there was anything wrong. Many addicts - I'm not saying all and I'm certainly not in a position to comment on your ex - but many addicts are dealing with damage done to them. A hugely disproportionate amount of addicts come from abusive homes, for example. There are pains and scars in them that they cannot face, there are weaknesses in them that those of us with healthy, supported and fulfilling lives can't empathise with. So whilst nobody forces those people to take the substance they're addicted to, their propensity for addiction is not of their own choosing either. "To pander and go 'ohh poor fella he's a victim of Society' just fules his belief that there is nothing wrong with him" Er, to say he is a victim of any kind *is* to say there's something wrong with him. What's under discussion is the reasons for what's wrong and how best to fix it. "Some addicts want to stop using and those that do will." Sure, and first they need to be clear that their addiction isn't helping any underlying problem, that it is in itself a problem, and then be given all the help it takes to get them clean. It's not only for their benefit that we should do it but also because there are, as you've testified, a far greater number of people whose lives are ruined by being close to addicts. It's a slog and often the effort it requires daunts them into giving up before they've started. How many smokers do you know who've tried to stop and failed? All successful ex-smokers I know took more than one go. We give state-funded help to smokers, and do it again if they fail and want another go. And, to re-cite examples, ditto people with STDs or those who get mugged.
|
|||
|
Merrick 2148 posts |
Dec 07, 2005, 19:26
|
||
|
Nat, first let me say that I'm genuinely sorry you've had to deal with a fucked up addict at close quarters, and in no way do I wish to belittle the damage done to him or you and others around him. "he said to me - 'don't worry as that won't happen to me as I'm not an alcoholic'... he won't take help despite the fact he's spent most of the summer in hospital through alcohol... working with alcoholics like I do, I know full well he's not the only one who thinks like this!" Then you'll know that, as Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous will tell you, the first thing to conquer in an addict is their denial. Denying it to themselves and others doesn't necessarily mean they don't have a part of them that knows there's a problem. Addicts who beat addiction will commonly tell of how they fucked up the lives of everyone close to them and denied there was anything wrong. Many addicts - I'm not saying all and I'm certainly not in a position to comment on your ex - but many addicts are dealing with damage done to them. A hugely disproportionate amount of addicts come from abusive homes, for example. There are pains and scars in them that they cannot face, there are weaknesses in them that those of us with healthy, supported and fulfilling lives can't empathise with. So whilst nobody forces those people to take the substance they're addicted to, their propensity for addiction is not of their own choosing either. "To pander and go 'ohh poor fella he's a victim of Society' just fules his belief that there is nothing wrong with him" Er, to say he is a victim of any kind *is* to say there's something wrong with him. What's under discussion is the reasons for what's wrong and how best to fix it. "Some addicts want to stop using and those that do will." Sure, and first they need to be clear that their addiction isn't helping any underlying problem, that it is in itself a problem, and then be given all the help it takes to get them clean. It's not only for their benefit that we should do it but also because there are, as you've testified, a far greater number of people whose lives are ruined by being close to addicts. It's a slog and often the effort it requires daunts them into giving up before they've started. How many smokers do you know who've tried to stop and failed? All successful ex-smokers I know took more than one go. We give state-funded help to smokers, and do it again if they fail and want another go. And, to re-cite examples, ditto people with STDs or those who get mugged.
|
|||
|
Merrick 2148 posts |
Dec 07, 2005, 22:55
|
||
Hmm, appears as soon as Manao was banned, another Thai word for a sign-in, same reactionary politics, same phrases used in insults, oblique refernces to things said to Lemon, same methods of crooked argument. Bit of a coincidence.
|
|||
|
Rolling Ronnie 1468 posts |
Dec 08, 2005, 09:47
|
||
|
'same methods of crooked argument' Ouch! You really don't like being disagreed with do you Merrick !!
|
|||
|
Rolling Ronnie 1468 posts |
Dec 08, 2005, 09:53
|
||
|
'And, to re-cite examples, ditto people with STDs or those who get mugged' Sorry, I've lost the thread here. I though you were discussing addiction.
|
|||
Vybik Jon 7720 posts |
Dec 08, 2005, 11:19
|
||
There is a sub-thread about addiction here, but the original point was about NHS Trusts opting not to provide services to certain types of patient. I think that's what the point of Merrick's that you quoted refers to.
|
|||
|
Rolling Ronnie 1468 posts |
Dec 08, 2005, 11:54
|
||
Ahhh... thanks Jon. Merrick changes mental gear too fast for a dozy old bugger like me !!
|
|||
|
Kid Calamity 9048 posts |
Dec 08, 2005, 13:24
|
||
I'd be careful Rolling, in case his friend is reading.
|
| Pages: 5 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| U-Know! Forum Index | |
