Your View on Addiction

gmarty

Hey Everyone,

I know I'm about to open a can of worms however I think I could learn a lot from it.

1.What do people think are the origins/causes of addiction.

2. And what is the best model of treatment to address it.

Thanks and Happy Christmas
G Marty

dar100

Many different causes of addiction!! The bio psychosocial model best explains the interaction of a number of domains, which influence it's progression.

The best treatment will really depend on the area of addiction one is working; such as, harm reduction, stabilisation, drug free. Within these areas, there are a number of evidence based approaches which have efficacy. These include;

Motivational Interviewing
CBT
Community Reinforcement Approach
12 Step Facilitation Therapy
Structural Family Therapy
Behaviourism

In reality all of these approaches should be utilised in conjunction with a Care and Case Management approach.

Additionally, many individuals coming from a background of trauma/historical issues, may need longer term therapy, so you can add psychodynamic psychotherapy to the list, and a number of other therapeutic modalities.

Then, you may have individuals presenting with dual diagnosis, histories of criminality, and many other issues.

It's a quite complex area to work in, and unfortunately usually staffed with under qualified people, outside of the HSE, that is.

gmarty

dar100 wrote: »

Many different causes of addiction!! The bio psychosocial model best explains the interaction of a number of domains, which influence it's progression.

The best treatment will really depend on the area of addiction one is working; such as, harm reduction, stabilisation, drug free. Within these areas, there are a number of evidence based approaches which have efficacy. These include;

Motivational Interviewing
CBT
Community Reinforcement Approach
12 Step Facilitation Therapy
Structural Family Therapy
Behaviourism

In reality all of these approaches should be utilised in conjunction with a Care and Case Management approach.

Additionally, many individuals coming from a background of trauma/historical issues, may need longer term therapy, so you can add psychodynamic psychotherapy to the list, and a number of other therapeutic modalities.

Then, you may have individuals presenting with dual diagnosis, histories of criminality, and many other issues.

It's a quite complex area to work in, and unfortunately usually staffed with under qualified people, outside of the HSE, that is.

Hi Dar,
I suppose the reason I posted this thread is because I have found myself in a few conversations recently, which some became heated because of conflicting point of views. i.e Minnesota model fixes all ! I don't particulatly agree although it works for many, my stance would be a more holistic view along the lines of what u posted. Iv been pondering if too much time is invested on models of intervention, instead of concentrating on the addicted individual?

I think each person is an unique individual along with their addiction, so wouldn't their recovery need to be also unique. I spend slot of time with people trying to sort out their lives from addiction and what I'm seeing is that as a society we tend not to focus enough on the individual.

dar100

Exactly, one model far from fits all. To practice professionally, it is important to utilise as many tools as possible, and use them in conjunction with where the person is at. That is why the relationship in therapy is so important, it acts as an anchor and everything else is built onto it

Valmont

gmarty wrote: »

I think each person is an unique individual along with their addiction, so wouldn't their recovery need to be also unique. I spend slot of time with people trying to sort out their lives from addiction and what I'm seeing is that as a society we tend not to focus enough on the individual.

I agree with you on this point. Each person has a unique set of circumstances and reasons for continuing to behave as they do. There is no true 'theory' of addiction so it's up to the psychologist really to help the addict as best they can. One thing is for sure, though, there are no quick fixes! Unless of course somebody just stops cold-turkey for some reason, which happens occasionally.

dar100

Valmont wrote: »

I agree with you on this point. Each person has a unique set of circumstances and reasons for continuing to behave as they do. There is no true 'theory' of addiction so it's up to the psychologist really to help the addict as best they can. One thing is for sure, though, there are no quick fixes! Unless of course somebody just stops cold-turkey for some reason, which happens occasionally.

people who this works for, generally have good recovery capital. Outside of this, the person will almost always relapse.

Sensay

gmarty wrote: »

Hi Dar,
I suppose the reason I posted this thread is because I have found myself in a few conversations recently, which some became heated because of conflicting point of views. i.e Minnesota model fixes all ! I don't particulatly agree although it works for many, my stance would be a more holistic view along the lines of what u posted. Iv been pondering if too much time is invested on models of intervention, instead of concentrating on the addicted individual?

I think each person is an unique individual along with their addiction, so wouldn't their recovery need to be also unique. I spend slot of time with people trying to sort out their lives from addiction and what I'm seeing is that as a society we tend not to focus enough on the individual.

I have read that list of models , they will all fail because they all have a built in flaws

Sensay

dar100 wrote: »

Exactly, one model far from fits all. To practice professionally, it is important to utilise as many tools as possible, and use them in conjunction with where the person is at. That is why the relationship in therapy is so important, it acts as an anchor and everything else is built onto it

Hilarious I love the joke about the HSE .

dar100

Please learn to quote properly, your statements are not making sense

Valmont

dar100 wrote: »

people who this works for, generally have good recovery capital. Outside of this, the person will almost always relapse.

Would 'recovery capital' be a person's self-efficacy, attitude, and general affect? I've heard a similar term before in 'psychological assets' meaning what I've just mentioned. From the research I've read the 'psychological assets' possessed by somebody experiencing chronic lower back pain are a better predictor of recovery than any biological markers!

Mathrew

gmarty wrote: »

Hey Everyone,

I know I'm about to open a can of worms however I think I could learn a lot from it.

1.What do people think are the origins/causes of addiction.

2. And what is the best model of treatment to address it.

Thanks and Happy Christmas
G Marty

For me addiction is very wide issue, and there are a lot of factors to consider regarding it's causes. And good for us that you've started the thread, it would let us know the different thoughts of each one here.

Mathrew

and also, for me.. I think drug and alcohol addiction(which my brother has) are the hardest addiction to cope up with, just based on experience with the siblings and read topics.

Sensay

Mathrew wrote: »

and also, for me.. I think drug and alcohol addiction(which my brother has) are the hardest addiction to cope up with, just based on experience with the siblings and read topics.

Your brother would be best advised to go to a humanistic therapist who has gone to the depths of there own wounds and addiction in addition to attending AA meetings.CBT and motivational interviewing will fail,and most of the others mentioned here,drug and alcohol rehab is designed to fail to be honest.

Valmont

Some very controversial views there, Sensay! What makes you think humanistic therapy is the only effective option for addiction?

Gilbert Grape

Have any of you's ever heard of Ibogaine treatment.

dar100

Sensay wrote: »

Your brother would be best advised to go to a humanistic therapist who has gone to the depths of there own wounds and addiction in addition to attending AA meetings.CBT and motivational interviewing will fail,and most of the others mentioned here,drug and alcohol rehab is designed to fail to be honest.

there is no evidence to support the use of humanistic therapy as the sole treatment for addiction. Addiction treatments, need to be forward moving problem solving therapies. An active substance user, will have many additional presenting problems, from housing to medical, and everything in between. Additionally, sessions need a structure, process therapies, are important. but, not as stand alone treatments

dar100

Valmont wrote: »

Would 'recovery capital' be a person's self-efficacy, attitude, and general affect? I've heard a similar term before in 'psychological assets' meaning what I've just mentioned. From the research I've read the 'psychological assets' possessed by somebody experiencing chronic lower back pain are a better predictor of recovery than any biological markers!

this would be part of it Vamont.

Social capital is defined as the sum of resources that each person has as
a result of their relationships, and includes both support from and
obligations to groups to which they belong; thus, family membership
provides supports but will also entail commitments and obligations to
the other family members.

2 Physical capital is defined in terms of tangible assets such as property and
money that may increase recovery options (e.g. being able to move away
from existing friends/networks or to a€ord an expensive detox service).

3 Human capital includes skills, positive health, aspirations and hopes, and
personal resources that will enable the individual to prosper. Traditionally,
high educational attainment and high intelligence have been regarded as
key aspects of human capital, and will help with some of the problem
solving that is required on a recovery journey.

4 Cultural capital includes the values, beliefs and attitudes that link to
social conformity and the ability to fit into dominant social behaviours.


Many people from lower socioeconomic areas, score really low on this. And it can take many years to develop. IMO this is one of the reason why there is so much relapse into substance use

Sensay

Hi Gilbert i have heard of iboga plant used as a cure for heroin addiction among other addictions,very good success rate,its origins are in the gambon ,in fact it was so successful i remember a doctor moving from the states to an island off the bahamas to start a practice in just iboga treatment ,USA would not allow her practice in America cant remember her name ,too much money involved in keeping people addicted to prescription drugs,methadone aka liquid hand cuffs, is more addictive than heroin,why cure an addict when you can juice him forever.Big Pharma

Sensay

dar100 wrote: »

there is no evidence to support the use of humanistic therapy as the sole treatment for addiction. Addiction treatments, need to be forward moving problem solving therapies. An active substance user, will have many additional presenting problems, from housing to medical, and everything in between. Additionally, sessions need a structure, process therapies, are important. but, not as stand alone treatments

"problem solving therapies" that's interesting

dar100

Sensay wrote: »

Hi Gilbert i have heard of iboga plant used as a cure for heroin addiction among other addictions,very good success rate,its origins are in the gambon ,in fact it was so successful i remember a doctor moving from the states to an island off the bahamas to start a practice in just iboga treatment ,USA would not allow her practice in America cant remember her name ,too much money involved in keeping people addicted to prescription drugs,methadone aka liquid hand cuffs, is more addictive than heroin,why cure an addict when you can juice him forever.Big Pharma

MMT, although far from a perfect treatment, does have an evidence based. And is a great treatment for Harm Reduction.

I really don't see how you can deduce that methadone is more addictive than heroin?

As for iboga, well the less said about that, the better.

Sensay

dar100 wrote: »

MMT, although far from a perfect treatment, does have an evidence based. And is a great treatment for Harm Reduction.

I really don't see how you can deduce that methadone is more addictive than heroin?

As for iboga, well the less said about that, the better.

Well if its evidence based it must make it true.I remember watching the evidence being produced and presented by American cigaret companies that proved smoking does not cause cancer.So i guess your right ,once its evidence based it makes it true,im 42 years at the coal face. I don't deduce anything, its fact about methadone .Harm reduction only surfaced after HIV.Read about how cost effective it is,drink our junk or shoot you own,Harm reduction to who and for who.It may make you feel better to see a junkie drinking instead of shooting.
Tell me about what your personal experience of consuming iboga is?
not something you read.
Joe Bloggs has done a study on MMT i think i will believe that for a while, until someone else does my thinking and studying for me.
Go out on the streets and ask addicts which is more addictive don't take my word for it.

jobbridge4life

Sensay wrote: »

Your brother would be best advised to go to a humanistic therapist who has gone to the depths of there own wounds and addiction in addition to attending AA meetings.CBT and motivational interviewing will fail,and most of the others mentioned here,drug and alcohol rehab is designed to fail to be honest.

AA is a cult. It also routinely fails.

Sensay

jobbridge4life wrote: »

AA is a cult. It also routinely fails.

Im not sure what you mean by cult,it has so many meanings,if its in the religious sense,AA membership is 53 percent have a believe in God ,44 percent are atheist and 3 percent gnostic.There is no charge to join,and there is no leader ,and when you leave, they don't chase you down to the pub and try bring you back.I don't think its a case of
"lets go down to the pub and get that drunk back, he makes so much sense when he speaks "yes the person does relapse i would not use the word fail,, .and no i am not a member of AA.

dar100

Sensay wrote: »

Well if its evidence based it must make it true.

Exactly, it is through

I remember watching the evidence being produced and presented by American cigaret companies that proved smoking does not cause cancer.So i guess your right ,once its evidence based it makes it true,im 42 years at the coal face.
I don't deduce anything,

Thats exactly what you're doing, in fairness

its fact about methadone .Harm reduction only surfaced after HIV.

Doesn't really concern me when it sufaced, what matters is that it works, and improves peoples quality of life.


Read about how cost effective it is

I agree on this point, but the potential cost to society and individuals, would swing it for me!!!


,drink our junk or shoot you own,Harm reduction to who and for who.It may make you feel better to see a junkie drinking instead of shooting.

Your use of this word is very telling, an extremely horrible word

Tell me about what your personal experience of consuming iboga is?
not something you read.

I tend to stay away from psychoactive substances


Joe Bloggs has done a study on MMT i think i will believe that for a while, until someone else does my thinking and studying for me.
Go out on the streets and ask addicts which is more addictive don't take my word for it.

I've worked with many thousands of MMT clients, and I continue to do so on a daily basis. I know exactly what they think about it. The problem is the MMT protocol, at a policy level

jobbridge4life

Sensay wrote: »

Im not sure what you mean by cult,it has so many meanings,if its in the religious sense,AA membership is 53 percent have a believe in God ,44 percent are atheist and 3 percent gnostic.There is no charge to join,and there is no leader ,and when you leave, they don't chase you down to the pub and try bring you back.

I meant it in a loose sense. It demands adherence to its own core teachings. What are its level of efficacy? Is total abstinence really the healthiest approach? What are the side effects of this treatment approach?

Sensay wrote: »

yes the person does relapse i would not use the word fail,, .and no i am not a member of AA.

Funny you had no problem ascribing that term to other methods though.

dar100

jobbridge4life wrote: »

I meant it in a loose sense. It demands adherence to its own core teachings. What are its level of efficacy? Is total abstinence really the healthiest approach? What are the side effects of this treatment approach?

You pose some interesting questions, here. Havent got time to go into dept. But, fellowships work for many people, but I often wonder is this due to the reasons the fellowship states?

I'd have lots to say about potential side effects, I hope to get back to this discussion at a later time.


Funny you had no problem ascribing that term to other methods though.

LOL exactly

Ash.J.Williams

my dad is obese and i am a borderline drug addict...i think it's the same part of our brain in different circumstances. I guess you need to train yourself NOT to be an addict

Sensay

jobbridge4life wrote: »

I meant it in a loose sense. It demands adherence to its own core teachings. What are its level of efficacy? Is total abstinence really the healthiest approach? What are the side effects of this treatment approach?


Funny you had no problem ascribing that term to other methods though.

I think you picked me up wrong,You say AA fails,i say the person relapses, i say CBT fails and Motivational interviewing fails etc from my experience.AA is not a therapy or bunch of therapists so it cant fail.There are no core teachings,there are no students there is no treatment,its a fellowship,they share their experiences of addiction.they have absolutely no interest if you drink or stop drinking, its up to the individual.all addicts are selfish and self-centered to the core and they will freely admit that,That's why AA works.You have millionaires who became homeless and some homeless who became millionaires.Addiction has no boundaries economic or social .

Sensay

dar100 wrote: »

I've worked with many thousands of MMT clients, and I continue to do so on a daily basis. I know exactly what they think about it. The problem is the MMT protocol, at a policy level

you say you stay away from psychoactive substances ,and yet methadone is one of the worst psychoactive substances. and you seem to be pushing it on this forum,i don't mean like a pusher. in that way,with your thousands of clients.
ah policy level, now i understand.iboga is a natural non addictive instant cure for some. MMT is addiction for life.

JuliusCaesar

Quick clarification for those who might not be familiar with the jargon:


MMT = Methadone Maintenance Treatment.






(Please remember not everyone works in your particular area)

Valmont

I think there is so much disagreement about what the best therapy is for a particular problem because any comparative experiments are unable to entirely control for the individuals involved. What I mean to say if AA helps even ten people then technically it 'works' and it is always going to have supporters who swear by it. Ditto for any therapeutic approach, I'm noticing now that many professionals are evolving away from strict CBT to a sort of 'third wave' CBT/Mindfulness/ACT approach which I've heard is more suited to a wider range of problems. It's just so hard and takes so many years to gain any clarity on why each therapy works as it does.

JuliusCaesar

Valmont wrote: »

I'm noticing now that many professionals are evolving away from strict CBT to a sort of 'third wave' CBT/Mindfulness/ACT approach

there's no such thing as "strict CBT" as CBT is an umbrella term. Most people use it to mean Beckian CT, but that's not CBT! There are many different approaches subsumed under the 'CBT' umbrella: Behaviour Therapy; DBT; CT; Ellis' CT aka REBT; MBCT; Schema Therapy; etc etc etc. BT is regarded as the First Wave, CT or CBT as the second wave, and Third Wave as ACT etc. (The term '3rd wave' was first used by ACT proponants.)


Just FYI



Or you could quote Beck: "the term CBT will be replaced by Evidence Based Therapies."


But how does a therapy get to be evidence-based? When people are inventing new therapies everyday?

Interesting thread.

If there's such a thing as an "addictive personality", I have it. I do everything to extremes. I'm off alcohol 16 months now, but my weight problem is worse than ever, as if I'm compensating.
I need to come to some understanding of why I do what I do, and change it, as my energy levels are seriously depleted these days.

My gp suggested CBT. What other therapy might be good for getting on top of this?

What qualification should I be looking for from somebody who practices CBT? Where can I get a list of such qualified people in my area? There seem to be a lot of people passing themselves off as "counsellors" of various types after some dubious course. Needless to say, I don't want to waste my hard-earned money on people who are not properly qualified in it.

corner of hells

Deleted User wrote: »

Interesting thread.

If there's such a thing as an "addictive personality", I have it. I do everything to extremes. I'm off alcohol 16 months now, but my weight problem is worse than ever, as if I'm compensating.
I need to come to some understanding of why I do what I do, and change it, as my energy levels are seriously depleted these days.

My gp suggested CBT. What other therapy might be good for getting on top of this?

What qualification should I be looking for from somebody who practices CBT? Where can I get a list of such qualified people in my area? There seem to be a lot of people passing themselves off as "counsellors" of various types after some dubious course. Needless to say, I don't want to waste my hard-earned money on people who are not properly qualified in it.

Theres professional bodies who may provide you with a choice of therapist or counsellors...IACP,IAAACP etc depending on what you are liking for.There members must be accredited.

JuliusCaesar

Deleted User wrote: »

............. My gp suggested CBT. What other therapy might be good for getting on top of this?

What qualification should I be looking for from somebody who practices CBT? Where can I get a list of such qualified people in my area? There seem to be a lot of people passing themselves off as "counsellors" of various types after some dubious course. Needless to say, I don't want to waste my hard-earned money on people who are not properly qualified in it.

Have you looked at the sticky here? Lots of info about how to find therapists of various kinds, including CBT.

Also how to find information about the various kinds of therapy, so you have an idea of where they are coming from, and what approach they take - mostly from the Irish Council of Psychotherapy, iirc.

And what kinds of questions to ask therapists over the phone, or when you meet them, to help decide whether they are a good fit for you, as well as decently qualified and experienced and so on.