>>>>Do you consider drug dependencies a diesase?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Asking for simple response along just one dimension might not be adequate even if ONLY asked about some of the complex behaviours grouped as alcohol dependancy. See Charles' answer for some of the factors involved just from metabolical side.
>>>
>>>Classifying it as disease (even though diesase can happen) for me is nothing but a way to decide who is footing the bill, and sometimes a legal cop-out (which in almost all cases is wrong from my POV, but I can't change it).
>>>
>>>And for me realizing there is an affinity/proclivity to use some substances more than the norm which SHOULD form the basis for a "disease" definition. In day2day life of a person it should not result in it being used as an excuse, but as a motivation to copy/change behaviour/hack yourself. Also realizing a) that people have their ups and downs and b) that falling off the wagon results in different degrees of damage across people.
>>
>>We agree completely and I agreed with Charles. My mother died of alcoholism and it was no disease. She was stone sober one day, started drinking and was dead in 3 years from liver failure. 1/2 gallon of vodka a day.... She was running from herself; blaming herself for my father's death in an accident. that's not disease, that's a choice. She chose alcohol over her 3 grandchildren, who she never got to see because she was stone drunk all the time and I feared for their safety in her presence.
>>
>>Mike likes that clinical diagnosis, because he can use it as an excuse. "I can't help myself, its a disease". He tries to gain sympathy from the people here, but I believe he has cried wolf once too often and nobody takes him seriously anymore.
>
>I guess we both are not the cuddling type. Probably also much easier to talk some sense into *us* before we get into the bull-headed stage, but this might not be the case for everybody - in some issues I not only admire, but envy the bend-before-break ability/personality. And Mike has avoided such posts this year rather well. I try to jump start with a kick in the behind - whereas I sometimes read your posts and classify them with a hit over the head. I interpret them to be intended as a NCIS-like friendly wake up call - but still easier to misunderstand in electronic form.


LOL .. that's true. I have always been forthright and blunt. I don't see the need to sugar coat the truth to make it palatable. I have many friends who have come to accept the fact that if they don't want to hear the answer, don't ask the question. It's not meant meanly or disparagingly, just blunt truth as I see it. If you think I'm wrong, that's okay with me, just don't pound on me becuase you don't like the answer you got. I don't suffer idiots or users well and there are a few on the UT who take advantage of others and expect them to do their work for them.