The Scottish Government—taking on instance among many—wants to put ‘lived experience’ (apparently, of ‘bad things’ happening to people, either antecedent or consequent to their drug addiction) at the centre of their response to the issue of drug addiction. While they appear to obsess over the rising number of drug deaths—seeming to take these as a proxy for the whole drug addiction issue—when a moment’s clear thought enables seeing drug deaths for what they really are: run-of-the-mill consequence of risk-laden behaviour.
Now I think that consideration of ‘lived experience’ is a must for inclusion in responding to drug addiction; however, over-emphasing this in our response-mix will be a mistake; because there is an associated risk of trapping would-be recoverers in a dead-end emotional cul de sac, constantly obsessing over the ‘bad’ things that have happened to them.
‘Bad things’ though, happen to us all, but most of us, I think, don’t obsess over them as some research indicates that drug-addicted people generally do (hence their drug addiction ‘to forget’); instead, most of us pull ourselves together, catch a grip, and move on with our lives.
A favourite ‘battle’ story.
Many will have heard that research has found drug addiction to be a ‘chronic and relapsing’ condition; some say disease, but in my opinion—constantly trawling the research—they have never given, and still cannot provide, robust evidence in support of this position. A few functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) shots of the brain correlating with drug ingestion simply will not do, because arguably more plausible interpretations of these can be made; neither will the much-parroted observation that many addicts in ‘treatment’ revert to addiction to their drug of choice, again because arguably more plausible interpretations can be made of this.
Is ‘treatment’ ‘up to scratch’.
Seasoned practitioners in the addiction field contend that the observed ‘chronic and relapsing’ nature of drug addiction could in part be a consequence of some ‘treatment’ regimes themselves—their rules and urine analysis and obsession with (illicit) drug intake, etc., being not all that far removed from the constraints of original addiction lifestyles.
From this point of view, is it any wonder that people sometimes relapse to their original addiction?
Would you send your dog for ‘treatment’?
Theoretically.. .
Essentially, our bodies accommodate ingested drugs, such, that Homeostasis (balance of things) is maintained for life to go on much as usual. Let’s take for instance, opioids (heroin, methadone etc.).
The body accommodates the ingestion of opioids by somewhat ‘re-setting’ itself for life with opioids; now if these opioids are abruptly discontinued, the body is no longer ‘set’ for life without opioids; it will gradually ‘re-set’ itself for no opioid intake, but until then, the individual will experience this ‘re-set’ as withdrawal symptoms from the previously ingested opioids; these can be ‘toughed out’, but many seem to prefer alleviation of their symptoms by simply resuming their opioid intake—whether say, heroin or a substitute like methadone.
Another aspect of this ‘re-set’ is that while initial doses of…heroin…might have the intended euphoric effect, the body’s continual ‘re-set’ dampens this down so that more and more heroin is required to achieve a satisfying ‘hit’; but…you can only take so much of anything before you reach a level of intake which kills you.
30 swift espresso coffees on the trot will generally ‘do you in’.
Opioid overdose is the point at which your level of intake is ‘doing you in’ unless speedy help is on hand, as in an overdose prevention centre (OPC); incidentally, some research has uncovered instances of people taking themselves to the point of overdose (forlornly chasing the old euphoria?) precisely because they were in an OPC.
Now some may say “Well that’s good—overdose prevented.”, and leave it at that; but this ignores the very plausible implication from these instances, that OPCs, despite harm reductionist propaganda to the contrary, can actually enable ongoing addiction for some with as-yet, no motivation to recover.
So.. .
From what has been said above, it becomes plausible that those unfortunately addicted to drugs—taking heroin as a proxy—eventually (and sooner rather than later) reach a point at which they are merely alleviating their withdrawal symptoms with each ‘hit’; seems a barren lifestyle to me.
It also becomes plausible that those seeking recovery by the substitute maintenance route (e.g. methadone) do not—contrary to what many of them seem to contend—require to take it for life because they have the ‘chronic and relapsing disease of addiction (utter ‘guff’).
Therefore…Catch a Grip.
And from all of the above, leaving addiction behind can be as straightforward as 1-2-3; or as complex as stumbling and stopping in the face of umpteen self-inflicted obstacles.
It’s entirely up to the individual.
*****
Catch a Grip 