Author: The Fix

  • AA's "How It Works" for Everyone

    AA's "How It Works" for Everyone

    Women have had to endure a generic “He” for God all these years. I am not rewriting the Big Book. I am simply asking for a moment to honor my God as a She; for a moment of freedom to express my God as I understand God.

    After attending AA meetings for 12 years, I picked up a coin this month celebrating ten years of continuous sobriety. Throughout my sober years, when asked at meetings to read “How it Works” from the AA Big Book, I sometimes replace “He” with “She” for the word “God.” Recently, an old-timer in my AA home group became highly offended when he heard me read my “She” version of “How it Works.” My improvisation became such an issue that it was put on the agenda at our home group’s monthly business meeting. A motion was presented to place wording at the top of “How it Works” stating, “Please read as written, do not make changes.” After much discussion, members of my home group decided not to make this change to our meeting format. Whew! How interesting! 

    As with any issue in recovery, I learned from this experience. I learned that people get offended at meetings! Ha. We can’t please everyone. I mean, I get offended at meetings, but I just accept things and go on. If I do not like the way a meeting is held I move on to another one. “Attraction, not promotion.”

    Thanks to my messing with pronouns, I find that I am no longer asked to read at AA meetings very often. Yes, the whole Big Book is written in He/Him-antiquated-patriarchal-Bible-form and I accept this. I mean, I got sober underlining everything in red that pertained to me as I worked my first step not caring about the gender terms! I simply did what my sponsor asked me to do. The pronouns were not important at that point. What mattered was that I did and do identify with the men who shared their message. Yet still, today, when asked to read at a meeting, I feel it causes no harm to insert She/Her instead of He/Him for my God. Women have had to endure a generic “He” for God all these years. I am not rewriting the Big Book. I am simply asking for a moment to honor my God as a She; for a moment of freedom to express my God as I understand God. That is all.

    Lately I have begun using a gender-neutral term for “God.” Instead of saying “He” or “She,” I simply say “God as we understand God.” For truly, I have experienced God as a spiritual man, as a spiritual woman, and most recently as pure divine spirit, with no gender identity at all. How could GOD be reduced to a He or a She, to a mere sexual form? Hence, my favorite definition of God is “Group Of Drunks.” Namaste: “The Drunk in me greets the Drunk in you” (the sober drunk, of course). I see GOD in all of you at meetings! It is my favorite vision! I love you all so much!

    I have to remember that “love and tolerance is our code.” If an old-timer is offended because I say that I have made a decision to turn “our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understand Her,” umm, hey, imagine what it took for me, a Hindu, and a lesbian, and a woman to read through the patriarchal (with Christian overtones) Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous! I am so, so grateful that my homies love and tolerate me enough to let me be me and accept me for who I am! As the Third Tradition of AA says, “The only requirement for AA membership is a desire to stop drinking.” And Tradition One calls for UNITY. That means members are given the freedom to think, talk and act. No AA can compel another to do anything. Nobody can be punished or expelled. Our traditions repeatedly say, “we ought,” never “you must.”

    I have to remember that we are evolving. I believe the AA founders, Bill and Bob, left room for change when they wrote on page 164 of the Big Book: “Our book is meant to be suggestive only. We realize we know only a little. God will constantly disclose more to you and to us.”

    Today, there is a new updated version of “How it Works” created by Hillary J and the Sober Agnostics Group. That alternative to the Big Book text is used at their meeting in Vancouver, BC, Canada. There are also two gender-neutral versions of the Big Book available on Amazon: The EZ Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous Same Message -Simple Language and A Simple Program: A Contemporary Translation of the Book, Alcoholics Anonymous. Neither book was created by AA so neither is designated as “Conference Approved Literature” by the AA General Service Office (GSO). It is important to remember that the term “Conference Approved” has no relation to material not published by GSO. AA does not tell any individual member what they may or may not read. Each group is autonomous and is free to decide what material is read at the group level.

    Offending someone at a meeting drove home the point that I’m a drunk, plain and simple. I just want to get and stay sober, that’s all. I learned that I am not the only one who replaces “He” with “She” when reading AA material. Many other people are doing this and changes are being made to the literature. Someday, we may see changes to the first 164 pages of our Big Book.

    I have learned that God is beyond gender – and it is comfortable to refer to GOD as simply “God” instead of a He or a She. For me, God is pure divine spirit. Close the eyes. Feel GOD now. Pure Divine Love! God is Love! I love loving God, plain and simple. I love feeling Shiva embracing his beloved Devi in divine union. Sigh, bliss. This breath, here, now. 

    I also learned that AA has evolved enough to publish a new pamphlet already approved in British AA called, “The God Word: Agnostics and Atheists in AA.” There is a quote in this pamphlet that Bill W. wrote in 1965 that says: “We have people of nearly every race, culture, and religion. In AA we are supposed to be bound together in the kinship of a common suffering. Consequently, the full individual liberty to practice any creed or principle or therapy whatever should be a first consideration for us all. Let us NOT, therefore, pressure anyone with our individual or even our collective views. Let us instead accord each other the RESPECT and LOVE that is due to every human being as he tries to make his way TOWARD THE LIGHT. Let us always try to be INCLUSIVE rather than EXCLUSIVE; let us remember that each alcoholic among us is a member of AA, so long as he or she declares.”

    I love the program of Alcoholics Anonymous. I love that we keep evolving and changing. I love that we get to ask questions. Here’s one more (ha ha): Why do we close some meetings with the Lord’s Prayer? I’ll have more to say about that topic later. That’s enough for today. Peace and love to one and all.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Two-Thirds Of Americans Support Legalizing Marijuana

    Two-Thirds Of Americans Support Legalizing Marijuana

    Analysts say that more politicians are getting behind marijuana legalization as their constituents express their support. 

    With two-thirds of Americans saying that they are in favor of legalizing recreational marijuana, advocates for cannabis reform say that the time is right for making major changes to United States drug policy. 

    “The train has left the station,” Rep. Earl Blumenauer told NBC News. “I see all the pieces coming together… It’s the same arc we saw two generations ago with the prohibitions of alcohol.”

    According to a Gallup poll conducted earlier this month, 66% of Americans support legalizing marijuana. This was consistent throughout all regions of the country.

    Young Americans are the most likely to support legalization, with 78% of 18- to 34-year-olds in favor—but even among older adults, support is high, with 59% of Americans over 55 supporting legalization. 

    There are some political differences, however. While 75% of Democrats and 71% of independents are in favor of marijuana legalization, only 53% of Republicans support legalization. Still, support is growing in the party and this is the first year that a majority of Republicans are in favor. 

    “Like support for gay marriage—and in prior years, interracial marriage—support for marijuana legalization has generally only expanded, even if slowly, over the course of multiple decades—raising the question of where the ceiling in support might be,” the Gallup poll concluded. “As the percentage of Americans who favor legalizing pot has continued to grow, so has the number of states that have taken up legislation to allow residents to use the substance recreationally.”

    This November, residents in four more states will vote on changes to marijuana policy. Michigan and North Dakota residents are considering legalizing recreational cannabis, while Utah voters are considering whether to legalize medical marijuana. In Missouri, residents will vote on three different measures to allow medical marijuana

    Analysts say that more politicians are getting behind marijuana legalization as their constituents express their support. 

    “The tipping point probably passed one or two election cycles ago,” said Tom Angell, founder of the news site Marijuana Moment. “It keeps becoming more and more apparent that it will be impossible for prohibitionists to reverse our gains. And as a result, more mainstream politicians are getting on board.”

    Last week, Canada became the second country to fully legalize marijuana, after experiencing a similar change in public opinion toward the drug. 

    “Politicians embraced it because it’s actually good politics,” said Blumenauer. “They can read the polls.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Global War On Drugs Is A Failure, Report Says

    Global War On Drugs Is A Failure, Report Says

    According to a new report, in the last decade, drug-related deaths have increased by 145%.

    The International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC, a non-governmental network of 177 organizations) released a report calling the United Nations’ global war on drugs a failure.

    The report addressed the United Nations’ goal to eliminate the illegal drug market by 2019 through a “War on Drugs” approach—which has had negligible effects on global drug supply while negatively impacting human rights, development, and security.

    The report recounted the terrible statistics: in the last decade, drug-related deaths have increased by 145%—with 71,000 estimated overdose deaths in the United States in 2017.

    In the past decade, at least 4,000 people were executed for drug-related offenses worldwide. The policy of extremism regarding drug dealers in the Philippines resulted in thousands of extrajudicial killings.

    In the United States, drug laws have resulted in mass incarceration. In many cases, inmates are convicted for personal possession of a drug. One in five inmates is currently imprisoned for drug offenses.

    According to CNN, the IDPC report asked the UN General Assembly Special Session on Drugs to look for an alternate narcotics strategy for the next 10 years.  

    “The fact that governments and the UN do not see fit to properly evaluate the disastrous impact of the last ten years of drug policy is depressingly unsurprising,” Farhan Haq, deputy spokesman for the UN Secretary-General, said to CNN. “Governments will meet next March at the UN and will likely rubber-stamp more of the same for the next decade in drug policy. This would be a gross dereliction of duty and a recipe for more blood spilled in the name of drug control.”

    In March, U.S. President Donald Trump proposed making drug trafficking a capital offense. The report states that while international standards do not allow for the death penalty for drug offenses, 33 jurisdictions retain the death penalty and stand in violation of the agreed standard.

    “What we learn from the IDPC shadow report is compelling. Since governments started collecting data on drugs in the 1990s, the cultivation, consumption and illegal trafficking of drugs have reached record levels,” said Helen Clark, former Prime Minister of New Zealand and a member of the Global Commission on Drug Policy, in the report’s foreword.

    “Moreover, current drug policies are a serious obstacle to other social and economic objectives and the ‘war on drugs’ has resulted in millions of people murdered, disappeared, or internally displaced.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Will Naloxone Be Co-Prescribed With Opioid Painkillers In The Future?

    Will Naloxone Be Co-Prescribed With Opioid Painkillers In The Future?

    While some states already require the co-prescription, the FDA is considering making it a requirement across the US.

    In an effort to decrease overdose deaths, doctors could soon be required to prescribe an opioid overdose antidote any time they prescribe prescription painkillers, according to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Scott Gottlieb.  

    The idea of co-prescription, according to the Washington Examiner, isn’t a new idea. In fact, some states such as Arizona, Virginia, and Vermont, already require the co-prescription of the overdose reversal drug known as naloxone.

    Naloxone comes in the form of a nasal spray as well as an auto-injection so it may be administered by those not in the medical field.  

    Other states considering such laws include California, Florida, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Utah. 

    Such laws are supported by the manufacturers of popular overdose antidotes, such as Adapt Pharma, the company that distributes Narcan. 

    “We are trying to do anything we can to build awareness and broaden support,” said company chairman and CEO Seamus Mulligan, according to the Examiner

    Kaleo, the manufacturer of the naloxone auto-injector, is also supportive, telling the Examiner in May that it “welcomes” the idea of co-prescribing.

    “We believe that doctors, pharmacists and other healthcare professionals play a critical role in developing and managing a comprehensive treatment plan for their patients, as well as helping a patient and their loved ones recognize the potential risk for opioid emergencies, even when pain medications are taken as directed,” the company said.

    Current laws vary from state to state. In Vermont, prescription rules are connected to other laws requiring doctors to check patient databases before prescribing an opioid.

    In Virginia, it’s recommended that high doses of pain prescriptions are given with an overdose antidote prescription as well.

    Additionally, doctors are encouraged to prescribe the antidote when prescribing opioids and benzodiazepines, as the two can lead to overdose.

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has made similar recommendations in its guidelines to doctors. 

    While naloxone can save lives, it’s not considered a treatment for substance use disorder. 

    “Naloxone allows someone another day to have an opportunity to overcome their addiction,” New York state Sen. George Amedore Jr. said, according to the Examiner. “It’s not the whole answer or the cure-all.”

    As such, some officials are also calling for wider access to buprenorphine, a medication that helps to lessen cravings and withdrawals. 

    The FDA will hold a meeting on Dec. 17-18 to determine more ways to make the overdose antidote more readily available. 

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Meth Shipment Was Disguised As Aztec Artifacts

    Meth Shipment Was Disguised As Aztec Artifacts

    A drug ring attempted to ship nearly 12 kilograms of meth to Hawaii disguised as decorative Aztec items.

    At first glance, they might have appeared to be ancient artifacts, or at least cheesy souvenir imitations, but a shipment of Aztec-style statues and calendars actually contained pure methamphetamine bound for Hawaii, federal officials say. 

    On Oct. 15, agents from Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) arrested eight people around Los Angeles, alleging they were involved in a drug ring that attempted to ship nearly 12 kilograms of meth to Hawaii disguised as decorative Aztec items. Officials say these were part of a “nearly 90-pound shipment that appeared to be colorful, decorative Mexican items, including replicas of the 500-year-old Aztec calendar stone.”

    A ninth suspect was already in federal custody on unrelated charges. 

    “Methamphetamine—no matter how it’s packaged—is a powerful drug that devastates our communities,” Mark Zito, assistant special agent in charge for HSI Los Angeles said in a press release. “HSI will continue to closely collaborate with our federal, state and local law enforcement partners to keep this dangerous contraband from reaching our streets.”

    Over the course of the last year, members of the ring have sent other meth shipments to Hawaii, the feds said. 

    The individuals named on the federal indictment in the case are Felix Salgado, 28, of Perris, who allegedly bought wholesale quantities of meth for the conspiracy; Vaimanino Lee Pomele, 49, of Garden Grove, who allegedly orchestrated the shipments to Hawaii and his wife, Alejandra Pomele, 44, who allegedly delivered narcotics; and six others.

    Recently meth seizures have been on the rise, fueled by Mexican cartels pushing the drug. 

    “They came in with much purer, much cheaper meth and just flooded this region of the country,” Richard Salter, a Drug Enforcement Administration agent with 27 years of experience, told KITV in September.  

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection has seen a 50% increase in the amount of meth seized compared to this time last year, according to Anne Maricich, deputy director of field operations for the agency’s San Diego ports of entry.

    “The other hard narcotics like cocaine, heroin and fentanyl, we see them—they’re prevalent at our border crossings, but nowhere near the quantities that we see of meth,” she said.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • New PSA Follows Woman As She Publicly Detoxes From Opioids

    New PSA Follows Woman As She Publicly Detoxes From Opioids

    “I am the most camera shy person in the world. But if making my detox public is going to help somebody…I’m all for it,” said the 26-year-old.

    The Truth Initiative, which has produced 20 years of anti-tobacco public health messaging, just released a new opioid PSA.

    This time, we meet 26-year-old Rebekkah, who agreed to allow her opioid detox to be filmed for the Truth Initiative to show the world.

    “I know these next few days aren’t going to be pretty,” she says in the six-minute video. “And I am the most camera shy person in the world. But if making my detox public is going to help somebody—even just one person—I’m all for it.”

    Rebekkah was once a promising dancer and athlete, but that all came to a halt when she was 14 and blew out her ankle during cheerleading practice. A doctor prescribed opioid painkillers, and as she says, it was all downhill from there.

    “That decision I made, to go to the doctor and not get the surgery, that’s the worst decision I ever made in my whole life,” she said. Her painkiller addiction eventually turned to heroin.

    The video fast-forwards through the early days of Rebekkah’s detox, describing the withdrawal symptoms that arise with each day. The video is shown in a public space, what appear to be busy New York City streets, as the public watches on.

    Day 3 is characterized by nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, drug cravings and depression. “I have a lot of self-image issues. My mind doesn’t tell me anything nice,” says Rebekkah.

    As the days go by, things are looking better. “Each day that passes I feel more and more alive,” she said.

    Rebekkah’s story—titled “Treatment Box”—marks the second installment of the Truth About Opioids public awareness campaign, made possible by a collaboration between the Truth Initiative, the Ad Council, and the U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP).

    The first round of anti-opioid PSAs released in June went for shock value. The four ads profiled four individuals who went to extreme lengths to obtain prescription opioids.

    Allegedly based on true stories, “Chris from Atlanta” breaks his own arm by slamming it in a door, “Kyle from Dallas” breaks his own hand with a hammer, “Joe from Maine” crushes his body under a car, and “Amy from Columbus” crashes her car into a dumpster.

    Critics of the ads say they were “disingenuous and misleading.”

    Aside from PSAs, Truth also offers resources on its website to educate and help those who need support—such as “What if your doctor wants to prescribe you opioids? Here are 12 questions to ask your doctor,” and how to locate a treatment center near you.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • FDA May Ban Flavored E-Cig Products From Convenience Stores

    FDA May Ban Flavored E-Cig Products From Convenience Stores

    If the ban becomes a reality, places like 7-Eleven, Circle K, Shell and Mobil would no longer carry flavored e-cig products.

    Continuing its crusade to push back on “epidemic” levels of young people vaping, the FDA is now considering whether flavored e-cigarette products should be limited to being sold in vaping shops.

    This would mean that convenience stores and gas stations like 7-Eleven, Circle K, Shell and Mobil would no longer carry flavored e-cig products.

    These four merchants were caught up in a nationwide undercover sweep over the summer that resulted in 1,300 warning letters from the FDA to retailers illegally selling e-cigarette products to minors.

    “We’re looking at what can be sold in brick-and-mortar stores and whether or not flavored products can be sold in regular stores like 7-Eleven and a truck stop and a gas station, or whether or not flavored products on the market should be confined to adult vaping shops, which generally tend to do a better job of checking ID,” said FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb in a recent interview.

    The FDA has been cracking down on e-cigarette makers and merchants based on the concern that vaping is becoming too accessible to middle- and high-schoolers.

    According to federal figures cited by Gottlieb, in 2017, use of e-cigarettes among high schoolers increased by 77%, and by 50% among middle schoolers.

    “We see clear signs that youth use of electronic cigarettes has reached an epidemic proportion, and we must adjust certain aspects of our comprehensive strategy to stem this clear and present danger,” said Gottlieb in September news release. “We cannot allow a whole generation to become addicted to nicotine.”

    At that time, the FDA requested that five major e-cigarette brands—Juul, Vuse, MarkTen, Blu and Logic—submit plans to “immediately and substantially reverse these trends” of young people vaping.

    They were warned that if they do not comply within 60 days, the agency may require the companies to “revise their sales and marketing practices, to stop distributing products to retailers who sell to kids and to stop selling some or all of their flavored e-cigarette products until they clear the application process,” CNBC reported at the time.

    In the recent interview, Gottlieb said that so far the FDA has met with Juul, Altria (MarkTen) and Reynolds (Vuse).

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • My "Beautiful Boy": David Sheff on Bringing His Family’s Story to the Big Screen

    My "Beautiful Boy": David Sheff on Bringing His Family’s Story to the Big Screen

    While watching the film, I would look over at Nic sitting next to me and get so emotional. I would start to cry and I feel like I’m about to start crying right now because I came so close to losing him.

    In “The David Sheff Solution,” The Fix interviewed the National Book Award-winning author of Beautiful Boy about his struggles as the father of a child with a substance use disorder. Now David Sheff’s story is about to be vaulted to the next level of national prominence. On Friday, Amazon Studios released the feature film Beautiful Boy, starring Steve Carrell as David Sheff and Timothée Chalamet as Nic Sheff.

    As opposed to being intimidated by this move into the public eye, David Sheff is excited. Since helping his son Nic find the path of long-term recovery, Sheff has dedicated his time and energy to raising awareness and continuing his efforts to reduce –and ultimately remove—the stigma surrounding addiction. Without stigma, Sheff knows from firsthand experience, prevention efforts will improve and treatment will become more accessible. Indeed, Sheff’s ultimate goal in allowing his story to be brought to the big screen is to bring greater compassion and understanding for this disease. Given our similar focus at The Fix, we are thrilled to again speak with David Sheff.

    The Fix: Beautiful Boy is a rare combination of both your most deeply personal work as a human being and your most successful book as an author. Was it hard to decide to expose such a story to the world, particularly in a visual format that lacks the distance of the written word? Was it difficult to let go and give director/writer Felix Van Groeningen the space to tell your story?

    The direct answer is yes. It was hard. Even from the beginning, exposing our family to potential criticism in a public forum was worrying. It has been worrying from the very beginning when I first decided to write about what was happening to my family for The New York Times Magazine. I remember asking a friend of mine to read the manuscript after I first wrote it. She was an editor, and I respected her opinions. I must admit today that her response surprised me. She told me, “You can’t publish this. There is all this stigma against addiction, and your family will be judged harshly.” As you can tell, she really counseled against moving forward.

    At that point, I already had made the commitment. I had talked with everyone involved, including Nic, and we decided to move forward. When it came out, there were no negative consequences at all. In fact, it was the opposite. I heard over and over again from people who had been impacted by addiction. It was all about sharing stories, and people seemed relieved to be able to share. They had kept their experiences quiet because these were their deep, dark secrets. They also had felt that they would be judged. It was so positive that the article and then the book led to the creation of such an open dialogue in a variety of ways from in-person to on the phone to online messages in emails plus on Facebook and Twitter.

    It’s important to note that every word in that book I scrutinized. I wanted to make sure that I said what I wanted to say while also protecting everyone involved. It ends up being really complicated. I felt everybody had suffered enough, and I didn’t want to increase anyone’s suffering. As a writer, I tried to be as meticulous as I knew how to be. The idea of allowing someone else to tell our story was scary in a different way: I knew I would not have that kind of control.

    Before it happened, the idea of doing a movie had never really occurred to me. To begin with, the writing started as a way to get through the night. The writing was a way of expurgating this deep, dark turmoil that I was experiencing. When we were approached about doing a movie, the first guy turned out to be the right guy. We were approached by Jeremy Kleiner, one of the principals at Plan B Entertainment, and he was sincerely moved by both of our books. He cared deeply about this issue because he had been through it with friends while also being deeply affected by the Dad’s perspective and the family story. He felt it made it different from the vast majority of addiction memoirs. The key point he made was that addiction was not portrayed in either of our books in a simplistic or clichéd way. He made the commitment to make a movie that would show the complexity of addiction, the fact that there are no easy answers.

    Although Jeremy was just starting out at this time, we believed in him and in Dede Gardner, his partner at Plan B, along with Brad Pitt, who is the CEO and started the company. It seemed obvious to make the decision to make the movie with them. Since then, they have won Academy-Awards for making 12 Years a Slave and Moonlight, but this was before they experienced such incredible success. When they brought on Felix Van Groeningen, the director of the movie, I was even more convinced. He’s a genius, and I was incredibly impressed and moved by his past films. Like the producers, he was connected and committed to the material. I knew we were in good hands, and I knew they would tell our story in all of its complexity.

    Steve Carrell is an American comic icon. In movies like The Office and The Forty-Year-Old Virgin, he has made us laugh (although he showed dramatic chops in Foxcatcher). What do you think of his portrayal of you in this film?

    There is no doubt that he’s a comic genius, but he’s so much more as well. Steve is an astounding actor, and I knew that long before this movie. Indeed, Nic and I remember so clearly the experience of seeing him in Little Miss Sunshine together. He was heartbreaking in that movie in such a beautiful way, and it was a moving experience for us to see that film together when it first came out in the theaters.

    When I met Steve, he was so sincere, warm, and committed to telling the story right. The other thing I realized was that he connected to the story as a father. It was not the drug experiences that drew him to the story, but the opportunity as a father to play a father desperately trying to help a child. He understood the deep desire as a parent to do anything we can to protect our kids. He expressed how badly he wanted to play that role because of the emotional component of the story.

    I must admit, however, that when I saw the movie, I still couldn’t imagine anyone playing me. It just seemed too weird. It really is disconcerting when you think about it, and, as a writer, I tend to think about things. When I finally saw the movie from beginning to end, I feel like he nailed it. He captured how hard it is and how hard it was for me to go through this period in my life. He captured what it’s like to be a parent of an addicted child, somebody you love more than anything and all you want to do is save them, but you keep running into obstacles like the denial and the horror of addiction. He captured that difficulty of helping someone who is angry and rebellious and lashing out at you as you try to save their life. I lived through that anguish, and that anguish is in every nuance of his performance and his expression and in his acting. I really was blown away and felt that he got it. Before I saw him do it, I honestly doubted whether anyone could do what he has accomplished in this film. You see his optimism and his crushing defeat, then you see him become optimistic again and then his desperation as his son keeps relapsing. The up and down and up and down is so powerful, but even more powerful is the through-line of his love for his son.

    How did you and Nic decide to move forward with the movie project? Did you both feel from the beginning that your book and his book should be turned into a combined film? How did you decide to combine the Beautiful Boy story with Nic’s Tweak, or was this choice made by the filmmakers?

    The choice was completely made by the filmmakers. It was inconceivable at first that they would be able to pull off two such different takes on the same story in a single film. However, I had heard how valuable it was for other parents to read Nic’s book and develop a new perspective on what their addicted son or daughter was going through. At the same time, it was really valuable for a lot of kids to read Beautiful Boy to get a sense of what their parents were going through, both from the perspective of the how much they suffered and the depth of their love. Many kids don’t realize how much a parent’s love is a constant in the process of trying to help their child recover.

    Still, each story had been told in book form with over three-hundred pages dedicated to each story. The idea that somebody could pull it all together in a two-hour movie was hard for me to imagine. It was not at all our choice, and it felt like they were jumping into the deep end of a stormy ocean without a life vest. Also, there was no precedent for it. I can’t think of a movie that was ever based on two different memories; one from the parent’s perspective and the other from the child’s perspective. I wasn’t sure that it could be done.

    However, you really got the emotional journey through the parent and the kid. I knew it was going to be challenging, but, once they made the decision, they never looked back. Over the two years that it took to make the movie, they kept to the course, and I feel they did it masterfully. It was a hard choice to make in the beginning, and it definitely was the decision of the filmmakers.

    As an aside, Nic did amazing in his interview. I was so impressed by the depth of his compassion and the veracity of his gratitude.

    He’s an extraordinary example of recovery in practice. All the time, I hear from people who are so discouraged because they’ve been through years of watching a child’s descent into addiction. I hear it about other family members and friends as well. They just don’t feel like recovery is possible.

    We are so lucky that Nic made it. Any parent is lucky that has a child who makes it. Nic’s drug use was so extreme, and the combination of drugs that he was doing was truly dangerous. He put himself into so many life-threatening situations during those dark days. There were so many times when it could have ended up differently. Tragically—and I feel so deeply for them because I could have been there— so many parents now experience the unforgiving horror of that outcome where they lose a child. Given Nick’s recovery now, we were very lucky.

    My experience seeing Nic go through this process has been incredible. People that go through recovery and come out the other end don’t just survive. Because of all the hard work that needs to be done, because of all the suffering, because of all the self-examination required to get sober and then stay sober, they become some of the most extraordinary people that you’ll ever meet. In fact, John, you are a case in point, and that journey from addiction to recovery, as you know from your own experience, can be inspiring to other people that you meet along the way. People that come out the other side can have the most rewarding and fulfilling lives afterward.

    I hear from so many families that are close to losing hope or have lost hope. Their relationships have been shattered, and they can’t imagine them ever being put back together. My experience with Nic has shown that families that do explode; [families that] feel—amidst the ruins—that it’s almost inconceivable that they will survive it—they do survive it, and they can survive. Recovery is still a possibility. If they do the hard work and give it time, they can be closer than ever. I believe we can say that about our family.

    Nic and David Shef
    Image Credit: Reed Hutchinson for UCLA Friends of Semel

    If this movie could accomplish one goal, what would you want that goal to be? What do you believe can be achieved?

    I feel the biggest impediment moving forward to end addiction, to face this disease in all its difficulty, to prevent people from becoming addicted and to treat people that do become addicted, is the ongoing stigma. Too many people keep their problem hidden because they are judged. People don’t go get treatment because they are hiding the reality of their addiction. When people start to get treatment, if they have the normal challenges of the usual ups and downs, if they relapse, they are judged very harshly. Being judged in such a way is the last thing needed by somebody who is addicted. They already feel terrible about themselves. They are caught in a cycle that’s like a vise, and they don’t want to be doing the terrible things that they do to themselves and to their families.

    I hope the movie can show people that addiction is not about choice. It’s not about a young person going out and doing these things just because they want to have fun and party and get high. It might be about that a little in the beginning, but it quickly shifts. Essentially, it is about pain and suffering and a desperate attempt to find some sense of peace within themselves. Addicted people talk about this hole inside them that they are trying to fill. The hole can be anything from an undiagnosed psychiatric problem like depression or anxiety to untreated childhood abuse and trauma. Whatever it is, I have come to see that it is about a pain that the person is trying to self-medicate.

    If this film can help with anything, I hope it opens the door to greater compassion and understanding for this disease. Without the burden of the stigma, we can move forward and actually help the people that need our help. We need to help people by overcoming stigma by focusing on effective prevention and treatment. People who are addicted are not weak. They are ill, and they deserve our compassion.

    At the Colorado Health Symposium in August, you start your keynote address after watching the film’s trailer by saying, “I’ve only seen that once, and it’s hard to watch.” What parts exactly were so hard to watch? Was it a combination of Nic’s descent into addiction and your inability to stop it? Did you have any PTSD-like reactions to the film, or was it a cathartic experience that freed you from the lingering demons of the past?

    Wow! That’s a good question. I guess the answer is both. It brought it all back, and it’s not like I had forgotten. However, when we get past traumatic experiences in our lives, we do put them in a place that we can live with. I feel like I had done that to some degree, and it made watching the film challenging. The experience of seeing it again opened up the whole thing again, meaning it opened up the old wounds. I just remembered how hard it was and how hard it was to watch Nic suffer. I felt again how hard it was for all of us to survive as a family.

    At the same time, it was amazingly cathartic to process what we had been through as a family. It was another version of writing the book, which had been really cathartic as well. It also was an affirmation of the hard work Nic has done to get sober and to stay sober. It was a reminder of how lucky we are to have come out the other side. While watching the film, I would look over at Nic sitting next to me and get so emotional. I would start to cry and I feel like I’m about to start crying right now because I came so close to losing him. It was a reminder of how close I came to losing him.

    In another sense, it was cathartic because I felt like it mirrored the experience of so many other people. It was a reminder of how many of us are in this together. When Beautiful Boy first came out in 2008, I thought it couldn’t get worse in terms of the number of people that were dying from addiction. The number then was about 36,000, and that doesn’t include people dying from alcohol-related causes. Of course, we know that in 2017, it was 72,000 dying from addiction-related causes alone, twice the original number. Things have gotten so much worse, and that’s why I feel that this movie is coming out at just the right time. So many people are suffering, and I hope this movie can help bring us all together and make us feel that we are not alone.

    You talk about how hard the disease of addiction is on families. Should families see this film together? Should parents take their teenagers? If they do, how should they prepare both themselves and their kids for the film and what should they do afterwards?

    Wow! That’s another good question. I guess what I would say is that every family is different. A reality that many of us would prefer not to face is that every kid is going to encounter drugs as they are growing up. It’s a prevalent reality in the world. Many parents ask me if it’s too early to start talking about drugs with their child if they are a freshman in high school. The clear answer is no. It’s not too early to start talking about drugs to your young, young child. Drugs are pervasive in our culture, and kids are curious by nature. They are confused, and it’s our responsibility to provide them with quality information to help lift that confusion. It’s our responsibility to shed light.

    Still, every family and every parent has to determine what’s appropriate for their own child. When it comes to seeing this film, that decision needs to be made for each family. In general, if your child is mature enough to see explicit and disturbing scenes of drug use, then I think this film could provide an amazing way to start that conversation in a family. What does it mean to use drugs? Why do people use drugs? What are the potential consequences to using drugs? These are crucial questions. Before watching the film, there should be a conversation that provides some education. In other words, a conversation that opens the door to a conversation. The best part of such a conversation is if parents can get their kids to talk.

    It reminds me of this recent work I’ve been doing with Jarvis Masters, a California inmate at San Quentin on death row. I’ve spent a lot of time in the prison, and I recently sat in with a group of inmates in the program as they talked about their experiences and their lives. They are trying to face the consequences of their actions by doing restorative justice. When I was leaving, I happened to be going to talk to a group of teenagers that night. I asked these men: “I’m going to talk to these kids tonight. Is there anything I should tell them? Is there anything anyone would have said to you that would have helped you growing up so you could have made better decisions later on? Maybe you would not have fallen into addiction and fallen into crime?”

    A lot of the men had really interesting things to say. At the end, there was this one guy who has been super quiet the whole time. He said something under his breath, and I couldn’t hear him. I asked him to say what he had said again. He looked up at me and said, “When you talk to these kids tonight, don’t say anything. Just listen to them.”

    I thought that was incredibly powerful, and that’s the message I would give to parents. Try to engage your kids in conversation and really figure out who they are and what’s going on in their lives. Then, it’s super important to continue the conversation after the movie. Keep talking and, more importantly, keep listening.

    Finally, people in early recovery should be careful when deciding whether or not to see this film. Given the explicit drug use and the unvarnished reality of addiction presented in the film, it may not be the best choice so they should talk it through with their counselors, therapists, sponsors or whomever they are working with to maintain their recovery. The research tells us that such scenes of drug use can be triggering, and that’s the last thing we want to do with this movie. Part of the reason the movie is so powerful is because the filmmakers committed to telling the truth, and that truth is that drug use is not glamorous in the slightest, but rather horrifying to watch.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Does Tech Addiction Play A Role In Workplace Mental Health Issues?

    Does Tech Addiction Play A Role In Workplace Mental Health Issues?

    Mental health in the workplace is an evolving issue that needs to be addressed.

    While technology is largely helpful in today’s professional world, it can also be somewhat hindering for mental health, according to Mike Serbinis, the founder and CEO of Canada-based employee benefits platform League. 

    “If people feel like they always have to be on, it’s stressful and hard to relax and get the downtime and rest your brain needs,” Serbinis tells Forbes.

    Mental health in the workplace is an evolving issue that needs to be addressed. In fact, mental illness is now the greatest cause of disability in the world, according to the World Health Organization. 

    It’s an issue close to home for Serbinis too; 44% of employees in his country of Canada have faced a mental health issue in their place of work. 

    “We see it among our data [at League] too,” Serbinis tells Forbes. “Between one-third to one-half of all employees using us are checking in or accessing a service that has to do with helping them manage stress, anxiety, depression, and so on.”

    In the United States, similar statistics demonstrate that one in five U.S. adults are living with mental health issues of some sort, though the number is likely higher due to lack of reporting. 

    According to Serbinis, it’s important to distinguish between the types of mental health issues. He says two of the biggest are depression and anxiety. “There’s a range of different conditions and illnesses,” Serbinis tells Forbes. “People speaking about mental health as one sort of general category almost doesn’t do it justice.”

    When it comes to struggling with mental health in the workplace, Serbinis says “tech addiction” likely plays a large role.

    “What’s happening is that people are getting conditioned to see those signals or numbers and feel like they have to go back and check constantly,” Serbinis says. “And that triggers this fight or flight response. Which jacks up adrenaline, which jacks blood pressure, which can lead to cardiovascular issues, which leads to anxiety… it’s a whole cascade of events that really emanates from this constant interruption.”

    One solution is to expand employee benefits to cover mental health, Serbinis says. 

    Forbes says that in addition to covering mental health services, some companies are also taking time for mental health “office hours,” during which a therapist may visit a workplace. Or, as an alternative, companies are covering subscriptions for online tools such as Talkspace

    Another recommendation is to not encourage employees to constantly check work-related notifications during non-working hours. “We suggest that people to turn off their notifications at home, and dedicate time for messaging and emails at work that’s separate from your other tasks,” Serbinis tells Forbes.

    When it comes down to it, Serbinis says, workplaces need to change their approach to mental health. 

    “The current way of doing things is not sustainable,” he said. “Employers need to see employee health and wellness as a core part of their strategy to build a top company.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Woman Uses Creative Writing To Help Ex-Offenders In Recovery

    Woman Uses Creative Writing To Help Ex-Offenders In Recovery

    “I learned how to live again, how to feel comfortable in my own skin. She’s a Godsend,” says one of Rebecca Conviser’s students.

    It was a cancer diagnosis that first got Rebecca Conviser interested in the power of words. If the Morristown, New Jersey woman didn’t make it through, she wanted to leave behind words for her husband and children. 

    But Conviser did make it through, and now she is using the power of words for something else—helping those in recovery from substance use disorder. 

    According to NJ.com, for the past six years, 79-year-old Conviser as has been volunteering her time by teaching the “Creative Positive Expression Program” to ex-offenders. Rather than jail time, these individuals have been recommended to the drug court programs in Morris and Sussex counties in New Jersey. 

    Thomas Brodhecker, 27, of Sussex County, has been in the program for two years. Since he first entered the program, his opinion of the role of writing in recovery has changed drastically. He says that through writing he has been able to peel back emotional aspects of his life that played into his use of drugs. 

    “I learned how to live again, how to feel comfortable in my own skin,” Brodhecker said. “She’s a Godsend.”

    Conviser fell into her role teaching the writing course after overhearing a conversation at a local coffee shop about the obstacles ex-offenders face when trying to find employment.

    She engaged with the group, which led to her meeting Charles Johnson Jr., the drug court director of Morris County. Johnson thought the writing program would be beneficial for ex-offenders when it came to writing resumes and cover letters. 

    However, the program goes beyond writing employment materials. For Anthony Justo, 27, of Morristown, Conviser’s passion for the program led him to be more accepting of his past. 

    “She presented these assignments with a fiery passion,” Justo told NJ.com. “She was lit up about helping people become better writers and better people.”

    In addition to the writing course, Conviser has helped ex-offenders with public speaking and telling their stories. She has headed up a jail cell presentation, in which school students stand in a 4×6 area designed to resemble a jail cell for 90 seconds to get a taste of what confinement is like for inmates. 

    Conviser says that when it comes to helping people change their lives, persistence is key. “I’m not one of these people who say, ‘oh well, it didn’t work.’ My feeling is well, it didn’t work, we have to move on,” she said.

    Despite her own personal challenges, including two cancer diagnoses and a recent Parkinson’s diagnosis, Conviser says she plans to continue to volunteer, though she has had to slow down a bit. 

    “I’m a person who gives back,” Conviser said. “As long as I can help people, I’m going to continue to do this.”

    View the original article at thefix.com